November, 21 2017, 11:30am EDT

Chairman Pai's Plan to Destroy Net Neutrality Is Built on a Mountain of Lies That Will Crumble in Court
Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai plans a full repeal of Net Neutrality protections, exposing internet users to blocking, throttling and paid prioritization of online content by the handful of internet service providers that control access in the United States.
WASHINGTON
Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai plans a full repeal of Net Neutrality protections, exposing internet users to blocking, throttling and paid prioritization of online content by the handful of internet service providers that control access in the United States.
Pai will release his proposed rule changes on Wednesday. According to reports, the chairman will seek to overturn nearly all of the Net Neutrality safeguards put in place during the Obama administration. In 2015, the FCC grounded its Open Internet Order in Title II of the Communications Act, a move that follows the laws Congress wrote and that federal appeals courts have twice upheld.
Pai is planning to eliminate the "bright line rules," which prohibit blocking, throttling and paid prioritization. His proposal would also take away the general conduct rules and other protections against cable- and phone-company discrimination. Under the current rules, ISPs can't "unreasonably interfere with or unreasonably disadvantage" people's ability to access and use the lawful content, applications, services or devices of their choosing.
This broader mandate to prevent unreasonable ISP discrimination, even when it doesn't fall neatly under a bright-line prohibition, is crucial to preventing interference with internet traffic at interconnection points and other "upstream" bottlenecks that ISPs can abuse.
Even worse, Pai plans to remove Title II classification of broadband internet access service providers. Title II gives the FCC the authority to treat companies like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon as common carriers of internet content. Common carriage promotes interconnection, universal service and competition among carriers, and is essential to preserving free speech for those who use the communications network.
Pai's proposal reportedly does little to clarify what authority the FCC would have to protect the open internet going forward, leaving the transparency rules the agency might retain on shaky legal ground at best.
The FCC plans to vote to overturn the 2015 protections at its open meeting on Dec. 14. The December decision will be the culmination of a seven-month proceeding, during which tens of millions of people urged the agency to preserve the safeguards put in place under the Obama administration.
Free Press Policy Director Matt Wood made the following statement:
"What Chairman Pai has proposed is dangerous and wrong, and he's going about it in the most incoherent and incompetent way possible. The proposed rollback of Net Neutrality rules makes no sense. It ignores the will of people from across the political spectrum who overwhelmingly support these protections. It ignores the law and the courts, which have repeatedly upheld the 2015 Title II rules. And it ignores the vibrancy of the internet marketplace following adoption of that 2015 order, with incontrovertible economic data showing that both investment in networks and online innovation are flourishing under the very same rules Pai wants to destroy.
"Despite Pai's fanciful tales of gloom and doom, there's no need for a reactionary rewiring of the FCC's rules. Free Press has shown time and again that Title II is the best and only foundation in present law for Net Neutrality rules; it also gives the FCC the authority to enforce other rules related to broadband affordability, privacy and competition. All of this would be lost if Pai insists on jettisoning Title II.
"All of Pai's bluster is simply cover for yet another massive giveaway to the handful of media conglomerates that want to control communications in the United States. The most-hated and worst-rated companies will be free to block, throttle and discriminate against your speech on the internet if Trump's FCC chairman gets his way. Companies like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon will be free to censor online speech and manipulate economic activity to their favor, while taking away the educational opportunities and political-organizing tools essential to millions of people across the country.
"The open internet uplifts the voices of people of color and racial-justice advocates, activists and dissenters of all stripes, independent content creators and journalists, and entrepreneurs. That's why these constituencies have joined together, alongside millions of individual internet users, to demand that the FCC leave the 2015 rules in place.
"Pai admitted in April, even before he launched this process, that he'd already made up his mind to unravel these popular protections and abandon the legally sound definition that makes Net Neutrality enforceable. But to surrender the FCC's authority to keep the internet open, Pai has had to prop up flimsy economic and legal arguments. He's repeatedly lied about the state of investment in networks, which have actually increased in the two years since the rules went into effect.
"Ajit Pai is the sole cause of any legal or economic uncertainty affecting ISPs right now, because that's exactly what his knee-jerk proposal to abandon the prior administration's achievements creates.
"One thing is certain: If passed, this proposal will face withering scrutiny in court. The FCC has lost every time it's tried to base open-internet protections on anything other than the Title II authority granted to the agency by a bipartisan congressional vote. This time should prove no different."
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
'The Pentagon Is Lying': Iranian Foreign Minister Puts US Cost of War at $100 Billion
Analysts have also cast serious doubt on the Pentagon's official estimate of the Iran war's price tag, with one arguing the conflict cost more than $25 billion "in the first two weeks."
May 01, 2026
Iran's foreign minister on Friday accused the Pentagon of deliberately misleading the American public with its formal estimate that the war on Iran has so far cost the US $25 billion—a number that the chief Iranian diplomat said was a fourfold undercount of the conflict's true price tag.
"The Pentagon is lying," Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi wrote on social media. "[Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu's gamble has directly cost America $100 billion so far, four times what is claimed. Indirect costs for US taxpayers are FAR higher. Monthly bill for each American household is $500 and rising fast."
The Iranian diplomat's comments came days after the Pentagon's acting comptroller, Jules Hurst, told US lawmakers under oath that the Trump administration has thus far spent $25 billion on the historically unpopular war of choice. The New York Times observed that Hurst "did not elaborate on the figure, which was strikingly smaller than the $200 billion the Pentagon had initially requested for the conflict and suggested a major slowdown in expenditures since the start of the war, when officials estimated it had cost more than $11 billion in its first six days."
Outside analysts' estimates of the illegal war's total cost to American taxpayers have varied widely, but most put the number higher than the $25 billion offered by the Pentagon.
The Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank, estimated earlier this month that the Pentagon was likely to have spent more than $33 billion during the first 39 days of the conflict. An April 10 assessment released by the conservative American Enterprise Institute after the ceasefire began put the war's cost between $25 billion and $35 billion.
Independent policy analyst Stephen Semler has estimated that the US spent nearly $29 billion on the Iran war during just the first two weeks of the conflict—an average of $2.1 billion per day.
"Hegseth lied to Congress when he said the Iran war has cost $25 billion," Semler wrote Thursday on social media. "It cost more than that in the first two weeks."
On top of direct war spending, lawmakers and experts have pointed to indirect costs of war in the form of higher gas and food prices paid by American consumers.
US Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) said on the House floor on Thursday that the Iran war has cost Americans over $630 billion—or $5,000 per household on average—"because of the increase in the price of food, the price of gas, the price of electricity."
"We need to end this war now, and help the American people reduce costs," said Khanna.
Linda Bilmes, a public policy expert at the Harvard Kennedy School, said in early April that the Iran war's cost to the US is likely to exceed $1 trillion in the long-term, when accounting for veterans' care and other outlays.
"It is hard to measure the exact cost," said Bilmes. "But based on what we know now, it is costing about two billion dollars a day in short-term, upfront costs, which is the tip of the iceberg."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Colluding in Broad Daylight': Trump Praises Louisiana Governor for Suspending Elections
"The MAGA court made their decision to gut voting rights just in the nick of time for Louisiana Republicans to postpone the scheduled primaries to slice and dice voting maps."
May 01, 2026
Louisiana's Republican governor issued an order on Thursday suspending his state's US House primaries to allow lawmakers to draw up a new congressional map, citing the Supreme Court's decision earlier this week that gutted Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.
Gov. Jeff Landry published his executive order just as early voting was set to begin in Louisiana's congressional primaries—and after some absentee ballots had already been cast. The order states that the US House primaries are "suspended for the duration of the May 16, 2026 and June 27, 2026 election cycles and until July 15, 2026 or until such time as determined by the Legislature," which is instructed to "pass legislation to enact new congressional maps."
The order was met with immediate alarm and outrage. Joel Payne, spokesperson for MoveOn Civic Action, said that "Republicans are colluding in broad daylight to try to rig the election and silence Black voters."
"The MAGA court made their decision to gut voting rights just in the nick of time for Louisiana Republicans to postpone the scheduled primaries to slice and dice voting maps to pick and choose voters of their liking," said Payne. "MoveOn members will fight like hell against MAGA’s extreme power play in Louisiana and push for stronger voting rights to ensure we the people have the final say in our elections.”
Heather Williams, president of the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee (DLCC), said the conservative-dominated Supreme Court has "opened the floodgates for racial gerrymandering in states across the South" with its decision in Louisiana v. Callais, which severely narrowed the 1965 Voting Rights Act's protections against racial discrimination.
"Even in ruby red states, Republicans see the writing on the wall that voters will hold them accountable for soaring costs this November, which is why they’re rigging the system to dodge accountability," said Williams. "The DLCC stands with Louisiana Democrats in their fight against Republicans’ egregious actions to suppress votes, and the mission to transform the landscape of state legislative power has never mattered more."
The Washington Post reported that Landry, an ally of President Donald Trump who took office in 2024, privately notified Republican US House candidates on Wednesday that he planned to suspend the Louisiana primaries.
"A new Louisiana map would position Republicans to gain one or two seats in the midterms," the Post noted.
In a Truth Social post on Thursday, Trump praised Landry for "moving so quickly" to suspend elections and order the redrawing of Louisiana's maps in the wake of the Supreme Court's latest assault on the Voting Rights Act. The Supreme Court's ruling struck down Louisiana's current map, which included two majority-Black districts.
"What is happening in Louisiana right now," warned Democracy Docket's Marc Elias, "is both a redistricting power grab and a dry run for authoritarian election subversion this fall."
If there is one thing the Republican Party should learn from President @realDonaldTrump— it’s to FIGHT!
That’s exactly what we are doing in Louisiana. Thank you for your support Mr. President! pic.twitter.com/W4rbcTuPp9
— Governor Jeff Landry (@LAGovJeffLandry) April 30, 2026
Trump, who has repeatedly floated the idea of canceling elections, also said Thursday that he spoke to Tennessee's Republican governor and secured a commitment to "work hard to correct" the state's maps following the Supreme Court's ruling.
US House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) voiced support for the large-scale redrawing of congressional maps in light of the Supreme Court's decision.
"I think they should do it before the midterms," Johnson said Thursday.
Landry's order in Louisiana is already facing legal action from state residents, who argued the governor's move would disenfranchise voters.
"These harms are not speculative," warns a lawsuit filed Thursday. "They are imminent: early in-person voting commences on Saturday, May 2, 2026. They are irreparable: once an election day passes, no monetary remedy can restore the franchise."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Privacy Advocates Relieved Trump Allies 'Can't Get Their Warrantless FISA Reauthorization Across the Finish Line'
"Our bipartisan movement in defense of civil liberties is holding strong," a Demand Progress campaigner said after Congress passed a short-term extension to continue talks on a longer renewal.
Apr 30, 2026
Just a day after Democrats in the GOP-controlled US House of Representatives helped Republicans send a major spying bill to the Senate, despite warnings that it was dead on arrival there, both chambers on Thursday passed a 45-day extension to continue negotiations.
The Senate approved the stopgap bill for Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)—which allows the federal government to spy on electronic communications of noncitizens located outside the United States without a warrant—by a voice vote. The House signed off with a 261-11 vote, just hours before a previous short-term extension was set to expire.
President Donald Trump and his homeland security adviser, Stephen Miller, have been demanding a "clean" extension of the program, while critical lawmakers from both parties and over 100 civil society groups have called for privacy reforms to protect Americans whose data is swept up in federal surveillance efforts.
Hajar Hammado, senior policy adviser at Demand Progress, one of the organizations leading reform calls, said in a Thursday statement that "intelligence agencies, the White House, and their allies in Congress have tried every trick in the book from fearmongering to misinformation, but they still can't get their warrantless FISA reauthorization across the finish line."
"The reason we keep ending up at this point is congressional leaders' refusal to allow votes on overwhelmingly popular, bipartisan reforms," she continued. "This 'my way or the highway' approach needs to stop."
According to Politico, US Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) told reporters on Thursday that he and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) discussed the short-term extension during a closed-door meeting the previous day.
"I think there's already a pretty substantial dialog going on" between key Democrats and Republicans in both chambers, Thune added. "We're interested in looking at some ways in which it can be reformed... So we're entertaining those ideas at the moment."
Hammado declared that "when Congress returns, Speaker Johnson and Leader Thune must allow votes on amendments for real privacy protections or we'll keep repeating this farce over and over again. Our bipartisan movement in defense of civil liberties is holding strong, and we won't accept anything less."
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), a longtime defender of privacy rights who had threatened to block the extension, highlighted on social media Thursday that he "secured a commitment that the FISA court opinion revealing abuses of Americans' rights will be DECLASSIFIED before Congress votes on reauthorization."
"The more Americans know about these abuses," he said, "the more they'll demand real reforms."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular



