May, 05 2010, 02:28pm EDT
Free Press Lauds Congressional Leadership for Support of Broadband Reclassification
WASHINGTON
On Wednesday, House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry
Waxman (D-CA) and Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller
(D-WV) sent a letter to Federal Communications Commission Chairman
Julius Genachowski urging the agency to consider "all viable options,"
including reclassifying broadband services as a "telecommunications
service" in order to protect broadband consumers in the wake of the Comcast
v. FCC case.
The Comcast case ruling called into question the FCC's
authority to protect consumers online and implement important goals in
the National Broadband Plan such as rural deployment and cyber-security,
consumer transparency and public safety initiatives.
Josh Silver, president and CEO of Free Press made
the following statement:
"This is a clear indication that congressional leadership supports
the goal of universal, affordable, high-speed Internet access for all
Americans -- and that classifying broadband transmission under Title II
is the best path to get there. The chairmen's support for the FCC to use
its full authority to protect consumers further demonstrates that
changing the classification of broadband has widespread support. It is
anything but the 'radical move' that the carriers have deceitfully
painted it to be. Modernizing broadband policy under Title II is the
FCC's only viable option to carry out the goals in the National
Broadband Plan, protect the open Internet and safeguard Internet
consumers."
Read the letter here:
Free Press was created to give people a voice in the crucial decisions that shape our media. We believe that positive social change, racial justice and meaningful engagement in public life require equitable access to technology, diverse and independent ownership of media platforms, and journalism that holds leaders accountable and tells people what's actually happening in their communities.
(202) 265-1490LATEST NEWS
'We Won't Be Silenced!' Protesters Decry DeJoy at USPS Meeting
Defenders of the U.S. Postal Service are warning about an austerity plan by the Trump-appointed postmaster general that "will slash jobs and shrink processing centers and post offices."
Feb 08, 2024
As the U.S. Postal Service Board of Governors on Thursday held a meeting in Washington, D.C., frustrated USPS workers, customers, and union officials rallied outside to protest a new limit on public comment and the agency's austerity plan.
While the quarterly meetings have previously included an hour of in-person and virtual public testimony, the USPS board has shifted to only taking comments once annually, a move that outraged critics of Postmaster General Louis DeJoy—a GOP donor appointee of former President Donald Trump—and his 10-year "Delivering for America" plan.
"We won't be silenced!" read signs held by protesters on Thursday that urged the board to allow public testimony.
"Let us tell the truth about DeJoy's 10-year plan," the signs added, calling for an end to cuts, closures, and mail delays.
"Thousands of postal jobs will be eliminated, and tens of thousands of employees will be faced with relocating to a new job, possibly a couple of hundred miles away, or ending their careers at the Postal Service."
In a statement about Thursday's protest, an American Postal Workers Union local and Communities and Postal Workers United noted that opponents of the plan have long argued it "will slash jobs and shrink processing centers and post offices."
The groups pointed to recent remarks from Steve Hutkins, a retired New York University English professor who runs the advocacy group and website Save the Post Office.
"Thousands of postal jobs will be eliminated, and tens of thousands of employees will be faced with relocating to a new job, possibly a couple of hundred miles away, or ending their careers at the Postal Service," he told The Guardian in December.
"The consolidations will also create excess space in processing facilities that will then be used to house a sorting and delivery center, which relocates letter carriers away from post offices," Hutkins explained. "The carriers will need to drive 10 or 20 miles to their routes, which will increase costs and pollution."
"And the excess space at the post office, where the carriers used to work, will lead to post office closures and relocations of retail services to smaller spaces," he warned. "In the meantime, postal rates go up, volume goes down, jobs are eliminated, service deteriorates."
There are currently two empty spots on the USPS board. As Common Dreamsreported last week, dozens of Democrats led by Congressmen Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) and Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.) urged U.S. President Joe Biden to "swiftly" fill those seats.
"Despite the passage of the Postal Service Reform Act, the Postal Service still faces a litany of challenges," they wrote. "Five price hikes since 2020, continual service delivery problems, and constant declines in mail volume are all indicators that the business model of the Postal Service needs careful attention."
Welcoming the Democrats' letter, Revolving Door Project senior researcher Vishal Shankar declared that "Americans are fed up with DeJoy's mismanagement of USPS. From his fanatical devotion to price hikes, mail slowdowns, and job cuts to his refusal to build the next-gen postal fleet fully union and electric, Louis DeJoy keeps demonstrating he is grossly unfit to lead USPS."
"America desperately needs a postal board that will end DeJoy's destructive agenda to privatize the post office," Shankar added. "I applaud House Democrats for speaking out at a critical time for USPS—President Biden must stop dragging his feet on these nominations, and take the bipartisan win of saving the people's most treasured public institution. After a yearlong delay, it's past time for the president to fill these seats with public servants who will protect and expand our public Postal Service—not more corporate hacks who will enable DeJoy."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Pakistani Government Accused of 'Inherently Undemocratic' Attacks on Election
"This is one of the most controversial and most rigged elections in Pakistan's history," said one parliamentary candidate from jailed former Prime Minister Imran Khan's PTI party.
Feb 08, 2024
As polling stations closed across Pakistan on Thursday evening, democracy defenders accused the South Asian nation's U.S.-backed government—which banned the country's most popular politician from running for office—of conducting a general election rife with voter suppression and violence.
"This is one of the most controversial and most rigged elections in Pakistan's history," Taimur Jhagra, a parliamentary candidate from the populist Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party, told Al Jazeera. "This is yet another black mark, and it's only because of the fear of the people of Pakistan voting for Imran Khan."
Jhagra was referring to the PTI founder and former prime minister who is imprisoned on what his supporters say are politically motivated charges that disqualified him from seeking office. Khan remains Pakistan's most popular politician.
As preliminary results showed Khan's PTI leading in a strong majority of Pakistan's constituencies, local and international media reported increased presence of military and police forces at polling places. Some observers reported ballot counts being stopped and videos posted on social media showed violence erupting at some polling places.
"After clear and visible chances of victory of Imran Khan's candidates in the preliminary results, the process of results got slowed down alarmingly," PTI chief organizer Omar Ayub Khan and PTI Sen. Syed Ali Zafar said in a joint statement.
"Pakistan elections are a sham without Imran Khan," exiled Pakistani politician and former Khan adviser Shahzad Akbar asserted in an opinion piece published Thursday by Middle East Eye.
Akbar added that "Pakistan has witnessed a terrible time for political dissent."
"The army has launched a massive crackdown on Khan's PTI, with leaders picked up on random charges or reported missing," he noted. "Journalists covering the saga have also
disappeared or turned up dead."
Additionally, the PTI's party offices and candidates' homes have been raided by police. Voters have reportedly been assigned to polling stations that don't match where they live, and Pakistani media outlets have reported faults in the vote tabulation system.
"Pakistan elections are a sham without Imran Khan."
One of the government's most controversial moves was the imposition of a telecommunications blackout that blocked cell phone and internet service across the country. Alp Toker, director of the London-based digital rights group NetBlocks, called the blackout "inherently undemocratic."
Government officials claimed the blackout was ordered for national security reasons following Wednesday's
bombings in Balochistan that killed and wounded scores of people. However, critics noted the nationwide nature of the telecom suspension in refuting the government's rationale.
"I condemn the internet blackout," candidate Bilawal Bhutto Zardari of the center-left Pakistan People's Party told Al Jazeera. "I ask the election commission, the government, and the judiciary to restore it. It will have an impact on voter turnout and coordination."
In the United States—whose government stands accused of playing a key role in ousting Khan—Democratic Michigan Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib asserted on social media that "we must stand with the Pakistani people as their democracy is at serious risk."
"They should be able to elect their leaders without interference and tampering with the process, and the U.S. must ensure our tax dollars don't go to anyone undermining that," she added.
U.S. Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas) said that "Pakistanis have the right to elect their leaders without cell phone service shutdowns and other authoritarian practices aimed at undermining election results."
"The U.S. must stand with the Pakistani people and make clear we will not support anyone working to undermine democracy," he added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Unlike Trump, No Charges in Biden Classified Documents Case
"If Trump had cooperated with the Department of Justice—instead of lying to investigators, again and again—he might have avoided at least some of the 91 criminal charges currently pending against him," said Rep. Jerry Nadler.
Feb 08, 2024
Special Counsel Robert Hur concluded that "no criminal charges are warranted" after investigating U.S. President Joe Biden's handling of classified documents from before he took office in 2021, according to a report released Thursday.
"We would reach the same conclusion even if Department of Justice policy did not foreclose criminal charges against a sitting president," Hur stressed in the report, made public over a year after U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed him to lead the probe into materials found at Biden's Delaware residence and the Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement in Washington, D.C.
Before Biden was elected president, he served as vice president and a U.S. senator from Delaware. The special counsel noted that "materials recovered in this case spanned Mr. Biden's career in national public life... He used these materials to write memoirs published in 2007 and 2017, to document his legacy, and to cite as evidence that he was a man of presidential timber."
Hur explained that although investigators found evidence that the president "willfully retained and disclosed" classified materials—including documents about Afghanistan and notebooks with his handwritten entries about U.S. national security and foreign policy—after his vice presidency, "the evidence does not establish Mr. Biden's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt."
"We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory," the Republican special counsel wrote of the 81-year-old president.
Politicoreported that "Biden's attorneys also wrote directly to Hur and his team before the report's publication to complain about the focus on the president's memory lapses. As documented in the report, they called the focus 'gratuitous' and urged Hur to revise his summarizations, saying it was beyond his 'expertise and remit.'"
Hur's report comes as the Democratic president seeks reelection in November. The GOP front-runner, former President Donald Trump, is facing 91 charges across four criminal cases. The two federal cases, overseen by Garland-appointed Special Counsel Jack Smith, focus on the Republican's interference in the 2020 election and his handling of classified materials.
Trump quickly seized on Hur's report. In a campaign email with the subject line, "Biden not charged for classified docs in his garage!" the Republican wrote: "He's mishandled classified docs... And now, his crimes are being SWEPT UNDER THE RUG!"
The ex-president declined to acknowledge that he is named in the report, which states:
With one exception, there is no record of the Department of Justice prosecuting a former president or vice president for mishandling classified documents from his own administration. The exception is former President Trump. It is not our role to assess the criminal charges pending against Mr. Trump, but several material distinctions between Mr. Trump's case and Mr. Biden's are clear. Unlike the evidence involving Mr. Biden, the allegations set forth in the indictment of Mr. Trump, if proven, would present serious aggravating facts.
Most notably, after being given multiple chances to return classified documents and avoid prosecution, Mr. Trump allegedly did the opposite. According to the indictment, he not only refused to return the documents for many months, but he also obstructed justice by enlisting others to destroy evidence and then to lie about it. In contrast, Mr. Biden turned in classified documents to the National Archives and the Department of Justice, consented to the search of multiple locations including his homes, sat for a voluntary interview, and in other ways cooperated with the investigation.
Addressing the report in remarks to Democratic lawmakers on Thursday, Biden said that "this was an exhaustive investigation going back literally more than 40 years" and Hur "acknowledged that I cooperated completely, I did not throw up any roadblocks, I sought no delays," even sitting for hours of interviews while handling an international crisis.
"I was especially pleased to see the special counsel make clear the stark differences between this case and Donald Trump," Biden added. "Bottom line is, the special counsel in my case decided against moving forward with any charges and this matter is now closed. I'll continue to do what I've always done: stay focused on my job like you do."
House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) said in a statement that "MAGA Republicans will no doubt now call to investigate the investigators—it's their favorite move—but the Hur report effectively ends the discussion. President Biden cooperated fully with the special counsel and redacted no portion of the special counsel's report."
"Unlike Trump, President Biden has nothing to hide," Nadler added. "And the contrast here is striking. If Trump had cooperated with the Department of Justice—instead of lying to investigators, again and again—he might have avoided at least some of the 91 criminal charges currently pending against him."
House Committee on Oversight and Accountability Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) also emphasized in a lengthy statement that Biden "fully cooperated" with his probe and did not exert privilege over any of the report while "Trump willfully and unlawfully held onto hundreds of presidential and classified records."
In addition to four criminal cases, Trump faces legal efforts to kick him off this year's ballots by voters and experts who argue that he is constitutionally barred from holding office after engaging in insurrection on January 6, 2021. On Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court—which includes three Trump appointees—heard arguments for a case focusing on Colorado's primary ballot.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular