February, 03 2014, 11:44am EDT
More Than 1 Million People Call on FCC to Save Net Neutrality
On Thursday, Free Press led a coalition of organizations -- including the ACLU, Avaaz, Common Cause, ColorOfChange, CREDO, DailyKos, Demand Progress, Fight for the Future, the Harry Potter Alliance, MoveOn, RootsAction and the Sierra Club's SierraRise community -- that delivered more than 1 million petitions to the Federal Communications Commission urging the agency to restore Net Neutrality.
WASHINGTON
On Thursday, Free Press led a coalition of organizations -- including the ACLU, Avaaz, Common Cause, ColorOfChange, CREDO, DailyKos, Demand Progress, Fight for the Future, the Harry Potter Alliance, MoveOn, RootsAction and the Sierra Club's SierraRise community -- that delivered more than 1 million petitions to the Federal Communications Commission urging the agency to restore Net Neutrality.
"Just two weeks after a federal court threw out the FCC's Net Neutrality rules, we delivered petitions from more than 1 million people who support the freedom to connect and communicate online," said Free Press Internet Campaign Director Josh Levy. "It's time for the agency to correct its past mistakes, reclassify broadband as a telecommunications service, and restore Net Neutrality for good. Net Neutrality is the reason all of these petitions even exist, and it's so important to protect everyone's ability to say what they want and go where they want online without an Internet service provider interfering."
The groups also delivered a letter signed by more than 80 organizations echoing the need for the FCC to take swift action.
"The FCC has the power to defend our right to communicate online, and to protect the public from predatory business practices from giant ISPs determined to invent new ways to charge us even more for even less," said ColorOfChange Executive Director Rashad Robinson. "Chairman Wheeler must take action now to reverse a decade of failed policies built on industry giveaways, and reclassify broadband so corporate gatekeepers like Verizon and Comcast don't get to determine whose voices are heard and whose are silenced."
A federal appeals court struck down the FCC's Open Internet Order earlier this month after Verizon challenged the Commission's legal authority to implement and enforce Net Neutrality rules. But the court laid out a clear path to put the FCC -- and Net Neutrality -- back on solid footing, signaling to the FCC that reclassification of broadband as a telecommunications service is necessary to issue Net Neutrality rules.
Avaaz Campaign Director Emma Ruby Sachs echoed this sentiment. "We could be on the verge of the apocalypse of the free, democratic Internet," she said. "Unless the FCC's Tom Wheeler acts now, the Internet could soon be controlled by the richest 1 percent."
"Hundreds of thousands of people have spoken," said Common Cause Program Director Todd O'Boyle. "Enough with third ways and fourth ways. Enough with endless litigating. It's time for action. It's time for the FCC to protect consumers, innovation and free speech online by reclassifying broadband."
CREDO Political Director Becky Bond added, "The FCC effectively killed Net Neutrality back in 2010 when it issued rules that would clearly be overturned in court and now that day has finally come. The FCC under Chairman Julius Genachowski lacked the political courage to stand up to Verizon and AT&T and pass strong Net Neutrality rules. But now there's a new chair, and Tom Wheeler has a chance to prove that the FCC is more than just another government agency wholly captured by the industry it regulates."
Petitioners emphasized the importance of Net Neutrality rules in protecting innovation and the future of the Internet.
"If Internet service providers are free to discriminate against traffic, they will get to choose what we see and when," said Demand Progress Executive Director David Segal. "Big corporations will get the fast lanes while innovative startups will wither in obscurity. The dynamic environment that facilitates economic growth and social interaction will become a victim to entrenched corporate greed. We cannot stand idly by while the Internet is destroyed by powerful corporations that refuse to invest their massive profits into network capacity."
Others highlighted the open Internet's role in protecting free speech and creative freedom.
"The FCC should read the comments from the people who signed our petition," said RootsAction Campaign Coordinator David Swanson. "Americans passionately oppose what they widely view as a threat to censor the most democratic means of communication left to us. Other media have been largely monopolized for private profit at public expense, and at the expense of open communication. Protecting the Constitution of a government of the people requires protecting the Internet from a similar fate."
PEN American Center Executive Director Suzanne Nossel added, "An open Internet is essential for creative freedom and the free flow of ideas. We cannot allow the gatekeepers of the net to selectively censor or promote information based on greed. History shows us that the most enduring and lasting literature -- from prize-winning novels to political tracts -- was not written by those who could afford to pay, but from those who dared to speak their minds."
Privacy was also a concern for many of the groups that participated.
"To violate Net Neutrality, broadband providers would need to monitor what people are doing online, making this a major privacy issue as well," said Gabe Rottman, legislative counsel and policy advisor of the ACLU. "The speed with which so many people signed the petition shows that this is something that Americans care about."
To read the letter, go to: https://www.freepress.net/resource/105623/dear-fcc-reclassify-broadband.
LATEST NEWS
Roughly 900 US Troops Still in Syria as Rebels Close in on Damascus
"Whether the Pentagon wants to admit it or not," U.S. troops "are likely involved in the broader conflict unfolding there right now," warned one analyst.
Dec 07, 2024
Syrian rebel groups' rapid advance on the nation's capital city of Damascus and the possible collapse of President Bashar al-Assad's government after more than a decade of civil war has brought renewed attention to the continued presence of U.S. forces in the country, despite the absence of a clear legal authorization.
The U.S. is believed to have around 900 troops deployed to Syria, mostly in the northeast, as well as an unknown number of private contractors. Nick Turse, a contributing writer for The Intercept, observed Thursday that American forces in Syria "have, on average, come under fire multiple times each week since last October," according to internal Pentagon statistics.
"Keeping military personnel in harm's way for the sake of foreign policy credibility has become increasingly risky with the Gaza war and the flare-up of the Syrian civil war," Turse wrote.
Kelley Vlahos, senior adviser to the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, wrote Saturday morning that "whether the Pentagon wants to admit it or not," U.S. troops "are likely involved in the broader conflict unfolding there right now."
Reutersreported Tuesday that as rebels advanced toward the city of Hama, "fighters from a U.S.-backed, Kurdish-led coalition battled government forces in the northeast, both sides said, opening a new front along a vital supply route" and "compounding Assad's problems."
As the coalition of groups led by the Islamist organization Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) and factions of the Turkey-backed Syrian National Army has quickly seized control of large swaths of territory, the White House National Security Council (NSC) said in a statement last weekend that the U.S.—which has previously armed and trained Syrian rebels—"has nothing to do with this offensive."
"The United States, together with its partners and allies, urge de-escalation, protection of civilians and minority groups, and a serious and credible political process that can end this civil war once and for all with a political settlement consistent with UNSCR 2254," said NSC spokesperson Sean Savett. "We will also continue to fully defend and protect U.S. personnel and U.S. military positions, which remain essential to ensuring that ISIS can never again resurge in Syria."
On Friday, the White House said in a letter to Congress that "a small presence of United States Armed Forces remains in strategically significant locations in Syria to conduct operations, in partnership with local, vetted ground forces, to address continuing terrorist threats emanating from Syria."
President-elect Donald Trump, who during his first term opted to keep U.S. troops in Syria for the openly stated purpose of exploiting the country's oil fields, wrote in a social media post on Saturday that "the United States should have nothing to do with" the current conflict.
"This is not our fight," he wrote in all caps. "Let it play out. Do not get involved!"
Trump's post, as The Associated Pressreported, came as rebels' "stunning march across Syria gained speed... with news that they had reached the suburbs of the capital and with the government forced to deny rumors that President Bashar al-Assad had fled the country."
Hassan Abdul-Ghani, an insurgent commander, said in a Telegram post that rebels are entering the "final stage" of their offensive as they began to encircle Syria's capital. Citing unnamed local sources, Al Jazeerareported that "a state of panic has spread as army troops withdraw from their positions around Damascus."
"They also confirmed that opposition forces had advanced in the western Damascus countryside and the withdrawal of army forces from cities and towns in Eastern Ghouta," the outlet added. "There was a rush for food items in markets in the capital."
Government forces have been backed by Russian airstrikes, Hezbollah, and Iraqi militia fighters.
Reutersreported that "Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said in an Arabic-language interview that Tehran would consider sending troops to Syria if Damascus asked, and Russian President Vladimir Putin urged an end to 'terrorist aggression' in Syria."
In a video statement on Saturday, a Syrian military commander said that "our valiant army continues to carry out its operations against terrorist gatherings at high rates in the directions of the Hama and Homs countrysides and the northern Daraa countryside, inflicting hundreds of deaths and injuries on the terrorists."
Anti-war lawmakers in the U.S. have repeatedly questioned the role of American troops in Syria in recent years and launched efforts to force their withdrawal.
In March 2023, a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the U.S. House put forth a resolution that would have required full withdrawal of American forces from Syria within 180 days of passage in the absence of congressional action authorizing their continued presence.
The resolution was voted down by 170 Republicans and 150 Democrats.
Months later, the U.S. Senate tanked a similar effort.
Erik Sperling, executive director of the advocacy group Just Foreign Policy, told The Intercept on Thursday that the Biden administration hasn't "put the war in Syria up for debate because they know the American people don't want another war in the Middle East."
"They know there is no popular support for putting U.S. troops at risk for this," said Sperling, who warned that "many of Trump's advisers will try to drag him deeper into this regional conflict in the Middle East."
The explosion of Syria's civil war in recent days has been disastrous for civilians in the crossfire.
Human Rights Watch (HRW) said Wednesday that "the outbreak of major hostilities... raises concerns that civilians face a real risk of serious abuses at the hands of opposition armed groups and the Syrian government."
"The bloody record of atrocities by all parties to the conflict in Syria is bound to persist until leaders go beyond words and support accountability efforts," said Adam Coogle, HRW's deputy Middle East director. "Without credible justice, there will be no end in sight to the suffering Syrians have endured, no matter who controls the land."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Fury as South Korea's Conservative Party Thwarts Impeachment Vote
"Today, citizens witnessed democracy taking a step backward," said the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions.
Dec 07, 2024
A bid to impeach South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol over his short-lived imposition of martial law failed Saturday after lawmakers from his conservative party left the National Assembly chamber and refused to take part in the vote.
Supporters of impeachment needed at least eight members of Yoon's People Power Party (PPP) to support removing the president, who apologized to the nation in a one-minute-long address Saturday morning but refused to step down after he briefly instituted martial law in a stated attempt to "eradicate shameful pro-North Korea" forces, plunging the country into a political crisis.
Yoon's gambit sparked immediate and sustained protests and was widely seen as a coup attempt.
Saturday's impeachment effort drew a massive number of people into the streets outside the National Assembly building despite below-freezing temperatures, and demonstrators voiced outrage when they learned that Yoon's allies thwarted the initial attempt to oust him. Just two PPP members returned to the National Assembly chamber to cast a ballot Saturday.
"I am so angry. I can't find the words to describe my frustration," 23-year-old Kim Hyo-lim toldThe New York Times. "I am devastated, but I feel honored to be a part of this historic moment for my country."
Another demonstrator said they intend to protest "every weekend" until Yoon is removed.
(Photo: Daniel Ceng/Anadolu via Getty Images)
Organizers said roughly a million people took part in demonstrations Saturday in support of Yoon's impeachment. Many also demanded his arrest.
The Financial Timesreported following the failed impeachment effort that Yoon—whose term expires in 2027—and PPP leaders "appeared to have reached a deal whereby the president would hand over political direction of the country to his party and agree to stand down at a time of the party's choosing, in return for support in the impeachment vote."
The Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU), which has over 1.1 million members, called PPP lawmakers who boycotted Saturday's vote "accomplices in treason."
"The People Power Party has turned its back on the people's wishes, effectively admitting their complicity," KCTU said in a statement posted to social media. "More than one million citizens gathered in front of the National Assembly. They came together because they cannot forgive a president who declared martial law and aimed weapons at his own people. Despite the cold winter weather, they took to the streets hoping desperately for the impeachment to pass."
"Today, citizens witnessed democracy taking a step backward," KCTU added. "They saw clearly who stands with those who would harm our democracy. The People Power Party must be dissolved. Those who protect Yoon must face consequences. It would be a grave mistake to think this can be resolved through compromise or constitutional amendments for an early resignation. Through the people's judgment, Yoon, his associates, and the People Power Party will face severe consequences."
Opposition lawmakers are expected to file a fresh impeachment motion next week as pressure mounts for Yoon to step down.
Additionally, as The Washington Postreported, "the national police have opened an investigation into Yoon on treason accusations by opposition parties and activists."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Top Democrat Issues Warning Over Trump Plot to 'Steal' From Federal Programs
"The Constitution provides no impoundment power to the president to unilaterally withhold funds appropriated by Congress," said Rep. Rosa DeLauro.
Dec 07, 2024
The top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee warned Friday that President-elect Donald Trump is planning to "steal from the programs and services that affect middle-class, working, and vulnerable families" by refusing to spend money appropriated by Congress.
Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) said in a statement that Trump's strategy, known as "impoundment," is "uninformed and unconstitutional," adding that "the Supreme Court, the Department of Justice, and the Government Accountability Office are all in agreement—the Constitution provides no impoundment power to the president to unilaterally withhold funds appropriated by Congress."
"It is the sworn duty of the president of the United States to faithfully execute the law," DeLauro added, "and appropriations laws are no exception."
In a new fact sheet, Democrats on the House Appropriations Committee note that "the Constitution gives Congress the power of the purse, and nowhere does it give the president any unilateral power to either temporarily or permanently impound—steal, withhold, or prevent from being spent—funds appropriated by Congress."
"The Framers were right to give Congress the power of the purse," the fact sheet states. "If the president had the unilateral power to decline to spend resources as directed by Congress, then those who rely on Social Security, Medicare, Veterans Medical Care, and other federal spending programs would be subject to the whims of the executive branch. The American people would be unable to depend on promises made by Congress in appropriations laws."
Trump has explicitly vowed to use impoundment to "squeeze the bloated federal bureaucracy for massive savings," a plan endorsed by the billionaire pair tapped by the president-elect to run a new commission tasked with identifying spending and regulations to slash.
"With impoundment, we can simply choke off the money," Trump declared in a campaign ad.
"They have no authority. Does anybody get that?"
Following Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy's visit to Capitol Hill on Thursday to discuss their plans for the "Department of Government Efficiency" (DOGE) with GOP lawmakers, The Washington Postreported that Republicans are "keen on expanding the president's power to impound spending—or refuse to spend money Congress authorizes."
"Musk and Ramaswamy said they were eager to test the constitutional limits of Trump's ability to unilaterally control spending decisions," the Post reported, citing two unnamed lawmakers. "Republicans largely left the more than two-hour meeting giddy."
Analysts argue Trump's plan to withhold federal spending would run afoul of the 1974 Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act (ICA). The law, as Propublica's Molly Redden explained, "forbids presidents from blocking spending over policy disagreements."
"A similar power grab led to his first impeachment," Redden wrote. "During his first term, Trump held up nearly $400 million in military aid to Ukraine while he pressured President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to open a corruption investigation into Joe Biden and his family. The U.S. Government Accountability Office later ruled his actions violated the Impoundment Control Act."
Democrats on the House Budget Committee recently pointed out that "although decided after the ICA passed, the Supreme Court unanimously held in Train v. City of New York that even without the ICA, the president does not have unilateral authority to impound funds."
That hasn't stopped Trump, Musk, and Ramaswamy from exploring ways to cut or block spending without congressional approval.
In a Wall Street Journalop-ed published last month, Musk and Ramaswamy wrote that "even without relying on" the view that the ICA is unconstitutional, "DOGE will help end federal overspending by taking aim at the $500 billion-plus in annual federal expenditures that are unauthorized by Congress or being used in ways that Congress never intended, from $535 million a year to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and $1.5 billion for grants to international organizations to nearly $300 million to progressive groups like Planned Parenthood."
Housing assistance, childcare aid, student loan programs, and other spending would also be vulnerable under such an approach.
"They want [to cut] $2 trillion," DeLauro told reporters Thursday. "Think about the discretionary budget. It's $1.7 trillion. Where are they going for the money? Where are they going?"
"They have no authority," she added. "Does anybody get that?"
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular