January, 03 2018, 11:00am EDT
Net Neutrality Supporters Launch 2018 Campaign To Oust Lawmakers Who Don't Vote For CRA To Overturn FCC Decision
Internet users will receive a text message with their Congress members’ voting records right before election day.
WASHINGTON
Internet activists are kicking off 2018 with a bang by launching VoteForNetNeutrality.com, a no holds barred campaign calling on Internet users to vote en masse against lawmakers who refuse to overturn the FCC's deeply corrupt repeal of net neutrality protections, using the Congressional Review Act (CRA). 29 Senators have already committed to support a CRA vote.
Congress has the power to overturn the FCC with a simple majority vote in both houses using the CRA, which can be forced to a vote even without support from leadership. The vast majority of American voters (including 3 out of 4 Republicans) opposed the recent FCC move, taken just as lawmakers head into a close election year. Due to CRA rules, it is virtually guaranteed that every member of Congress will have to go on the record as either for or against.
The campaign page displays a scoreboard showing which lawmakers have already signed on to vote for the CRA to overturn the FCC order, and which ones have not. Once a voter signs the pledge, they'll receive a text message on the eve of the next election with their local lawmakers' net neutrality voting record, with a reminder to not vote for anyone who didn't support net neutrality in the CRA vote.
See the page here: votefornetneutrality.com
The fight for digital rights has matured into an election year issue. Millions of people from across the political spectrum who called on the FCC and Congress to keep the rules and were ignored will be taking their anger to the polls in 2018.
Evan Greer, campaign director of Fight for the Future, said: "The public has spoken and voters are demanding that their lawmakers do their jobs and defend net neutrality. Any lawmaker that ignores the overwhelming consensus among tech experts and this level of public outcry doesn't deserve to be in office. News outlets keep asking whether net neutrality will be an election issue in 2018. We are going to make it one."
The pledge on the page could not be more clear. It reads, "Dear Congress: Unless you vote for a CRA to overturn the FCC net neutrality vote, I will not vote for you. I have given my phone number to Fight for the Future, who will text me your voting record on the eve of your next election."
"Lobbyists are foaming at the mouth at the chance to ram through bad legislation that permanently undermines net neutrality." added Tiffiniy Cheng, co-founder of Fight for the Future, "The FCC just slashed 22 years of net neutrality rules and precedent even though they're at the heart of what makes the Internet work, and are overwhelmingly popular with voters from across the political spectrum. The Congressional Review Act exists for a reason--for Congress to overturn undemocratic changes at federal agencies. Congress has a moral imperative to use their CRA powers to overturn the FCC's rogue action to end the basic principle of the open Internet and are supported by the majority of the public. Whoever doesn't will pay at the polls."
Fight for the Future is a group of artists, engineers, activists, and technologists who have been behind the largest online protests in human history, channeling Internet outrage into political power to win public interest victories previously thought to be impossible. We fight for a future where technology liberates -- not oppresses -- us.
(508) 368-3026LATEST NEWS
Lemkin Institute Rebukes Clinton for Blaming Youth Outrage Over Gaza Genocide on TikTok
"Young people in the US are not stupid or gullible. They simply reject genocide—something the secretary might consider."
Dec 10, 2025
The world's leading genocide prevention group this week accused former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of "outright genocide denial" for comments last week attributing young Americans' opposition to Israel's US-backed genocide in Gaza on social media.
Speaking last week at the Israel Hayom Summit in New York, Clinton asserted that young people's support for Palestine stems from the fact that they are "getting their information from social media, particularly TikTok," adding that many younger Jewish Americans “don’t know the history and don’t understand" the Israel-Palestine issue.
On Monday, the Philadelphia-based Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention and Human Security—named for Raphael Lemkin, a lawyer and Holocaust survivor who coined the term genocide—published a statement arguing that "Secretary Clinton’s framing is not at all an accurate reflection of why Americans are growing more critical of Israel."
"Young Americans of all political stripes have not fallen prey to propaganda, though that is always a legitimate concern," the institute said. "Rather, they have consumed two years of videos depicting Israel’s genocide against Palestinians that have been uploaded by Palestinian journalists, ordinary people trying to survive in Gaza, [Israel Defense Forces] soldiers, and ordinary Israelis themselves."
"There has been no convincing refutation of the sheer amount of raw evidence of genocide coming out of Palestine," the institute contended. "Young people in the US are not stupid or gullible. They simply reject genocide—something the secretary might consider doing as well."
Wow: Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention (named for Holocaust survivor Raphael Lemkin, who coined term "genocide") calls Clinton's remarks "genocide denial.""Young people in the US are not stupid or gullible. They simply reject genocide – something the Secretary might consider doing as well."
[image or embed]
— Prem Thakker ツ (@premthakker.bsky.social) December 9, 2025 at 11:15 AM
LIGP continued:
Secretary Clinton appears not to be bothered by the reality of genocidal violence—in fact, she did not mention anything about it. Her concern is, rather, in her words, “the narrative”—the fact that these crimes are no longer hidden and are now being livestreamed and documented in real time, making it harder for her and others to control it. TikTok cannot be blamed for the fact that many members of Gen Z understand that Israel is committing genocide, since so many other people, including those who never look at TikTok, also hold that view. Apart from the Lemkin Institute, the vast majority of large, mainstream human rights organizations, the [United Nations], and many scholars as well as international legal bodies have denounced Israel’s actions in Gaza as genocide. Many carefully researched reports by international organizations have established that Israel’s crimes meet the international legal threshold for genocide. We encourage the former secretary to read them.
"The Lemkin Institute continues to support students and young people worldwide for having the courage to stand up for their convictions, to speak truth to power, and to fight against the scourge of genocide in Palestine and elsewhere," LIGP added. "Secretary Clinton’s remarks are not only inaccurate—they are also a shameful example of the lengths to which people complicit in genocide will go to to deny its existence."
The institute's rebuke of Clinton's comments came as the International Court of Justice in The Hague adjudicates a genocide case against Israel filed by South Africa and supported by around two dozen nations. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant—who ordered the "complete siege" of Gaza that fueled famine and disease—are also wanted by the International Criminal Court, also located in the The Hague, for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity including murder and forced starvation.
Lemkin's denunciation also comes amid a tenuous ceasefire between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, a truce Israeli forces have broken more than 500 times, according to officials in the Palestinian exclave. Israeli officials say Palestinian resistance fighters have violated the ceasefire more than 30 times.
Since the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023, Israel's annihilation and siege of Gaza have left more than 250,000 Palestinians dead, maimed, or missing and around 2 million more forcibly displaced, starved, or sickened. Israeli military data suggests that of the the more than 70,000 Palestinian deaths, over 8 in 10 were civilians.
Through it all, the United States has backed Israel with more than $21 billion worth of weaponry and diplomatic support including repeatedly vetoing United Nations Security Council ceasefire resolutions.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Hakeem Jeffries Pilloried for Putting Pro-Industry Democrats on AI Policy Task Force, Despite Voter Distrust of Big Tech
"This is the most populist moment of voter rage I've ever seen, and the leading Democrats are absolutely hostile to the idea of doing anything to address Silicon Valley's massive power," said one anti-monopoly expert.
Dec 10, 2025
At a time when the American public, and especially Democratic voters, express overwhelming distrust of artificial intelligence and Big Tech, the top House Democrat is being accused of failing to meet the moment.
On Tuesday, in preparation for an executive order to be signed this week by President Donald Trump, which would seek to block states from implementing new AI regulations, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) unveiled his own effort to cozy up to the industry, whose major players have set aside more than $200 million to push out anti-AI politicians during the 2026 midterms, according to the New York Times.
Jeffries announced the creation of a “House Democratic Commission on AI and the Innovation Economy,” which will “develop policy expertise in partnership with the innovation community, relevant stakeholders, and committees of jurisdiction.”
What immediately caught the eye of critics was the list of fellow Democrats Jeffries picked to serve on the commission. It will be co-chaired by Reps. Ted Lieu (Calif.), Josh Gottheimer (NJ), and Valerie Foushee (NC), with Reps. Zoe Lofgren (Calif.) and Frank Pallone (NJ) serving as ex officio co-chairs.
As Sludge reported Tuesday: "The panel’s leaders rank among the House Democrats with the deepest ties to Big Tech and AI, from holding millions of dollars in tech stock to the contributions they’ve raised for their campaigns and the Republican-backed deregulation bills they've signed onto."
In July, Gottheimer introduced a bill along with Rep. French Hill (R-Ark.) "that would require financial regulators to create 'AI Innovation Labs' where firms could experiment with AI-driven financial products under looser regulations and without the normal threats of enforcement actions."
Gottheimer is also a major stakeholder in Microsoft, which has invested tens of millions of dollars into AI and nearly $7.5 million on lobbying in 2025 so far. Beyond the almost $100,000 in contributions Gottheimer has received from Microsoft, he is also a former executive who received anywhere from $1 million to $5 million last year from his stock holdings in the company, according to financial disclosure forms. He also frequently trades in other AI power players like Amazon, Meta, and Dell.
Lofgren, meanwhile, has accepted more money from the Internet industry over the course of her career than all but one other current House Democrat—including $265,000 from Google, $115,000 from Apple, and $110,000 from Meta, according to data from OpenSecrets.
In September 2024, Lofgren co-sponsored a bill introduced by Rep. Jay Abernolte (R-Calif.) which "would create a federal 'center for AI advancement and reliability' that it would instruct to work closely with private companies and other stakeholders on developing 'voluntary best practices and technical standards for evaluating the reliability, robustness, resilience, security, and safety of artificial intelligence systems.'"
Foushee, a member of the corporate-backed New Democrat Coalition, rode to Congress in 2022 with more than $1 million from the Protect Our Future political action committee, which was backed by former FTX CEO and convicted fraudster Sam Bankman-Fried.
In response to Trump's industry-friendly "AI Action Plan" in July, Foushee and the New Democrats unveiled their own "Innovation Agenda," which called for federal tax credits to companies that "reskill" workers and perform private research and development as well as federal investments in apprenticeships and "labor market data modernization."
Jeffries has neglected to take a position on Trump's proposal to preempt state regulations. Last Monday, he told reporters, "That conversation hasn't been brought to the leadership level yet."
In his statement announcing the Democratic commission on Tuesday, Jeffries said, "It is important that American companies continue to thrive" in the arena of AI, while "at the same time, Congress must consider what policies are needed to prevent bad actors from exploiting this transformative technology and inflicting harm upon the American people." However, he did not specifically mention Trump's pending block on state regulations.
A poll released Friday by the progressive group Demand Progress showed that Americans across the political spectrum are unsettled by AI's influence in Washington: 68% of respondents overall said they were more worried that "the US government will not regulate artificial intelligence enough," as opposed to just 21% who feared too much regulation. While Democrats and independents were somewhat more concerned about underregulation at 71%, Republicans largely shared those fears, with 62% saying they feared the government would not regulate AI enough.
The consensus was even stronger regarding Big Tech's power over AI policy, with 78% of respondents overall saying it had too much influence. This included 81% of Democrats and independents and 74% of Republicans.
With this in mind, many critics were puzzled by Jeffries' decision to stack his AI commission with some of the industry's top allies.
As Aaron Regunberg wrote in the New Republic last month, harnessing anger against the rapid, largely unregulated expansion of expensive, energy-sucking AI data centers was an essential part of Democrats' victories across the board in November's off-year elections:
In New Jersey, Gov.-elect Mikie Sherrill’s closing argument was a pledge to freeze electricity rates, which have soared because of data-center demand.
In Virginia, Gov.-elect Abigail Spanberger won after pledging to make data centers “pay their own way,” and many Democrats went even further.
At least one candidate, John McAuliff, flipped a seat in the House of Delegates by focusing almost entirely on tying his Republican opponent to the “unchecked growth” of data centers, with an ad that asked, “Do you want more of these in your backyard?”
And in Georgia, Democrats won their first nonfederal statewide races in decades, earning 60% of the vote against two Republican members of the Public Service Commission by criticizing Big Tech “sweetheart deals” and campaigning for policies “to ensure that the communities that they’re extracting from” don’t end up with their “water supplies … tapped out or their energy … maxed out.”
"This is the most populist moment of voter rage I've ever seen, and the leading Democrats are absolutely hostile to the idea of doing anything to address Silicon Valley's massive power," said Matt Stoller, an anti-monopoly expert.
"Anticorruption is one of the strongest arguments with the broadest appeal in American politics right now, but the Democratic leadership simply refuses to stop tanking it," added Matt Duss, a former advisor to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
"I have never seen a gulf this wide between Democratic leadership and the party writ large," said author Zachary D. Carter. "The top is corrupt, the base is raging against corruption."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'A Good Day for Our Democracy': Judge Orders Trump to End National Guard Deployment in LA
"For more than five months, the Trump administration has held California National Guard troops hostage as part of its political games," said California's attorney general. "But the president is not king."
Dec 10, 2025
In a win for Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom, state Attorney General Rob Bonta, and the residents of Los Angeles, a federal judge on Wednesday ordered President Donald Trump to stop deploying the National Guard in the nation's second-largest city.
"The founders designed our government to be a system of checks and balances," wrote US District Judge Charles Breyer, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton. "Defendants, however, make clear that the only check they want is a blank one."
Trump mobilized around 4,000 California National Guard troops in June amid protests against his violent crackdown on undocumented immigrants. Since then, the Republican leader has also pursued deployments in other Democrat-led cities, including Chicago, Illinois; Portland, Oregon; and Washington, DC, where two soldiers were recently shot.
The new ruling from San Francisco-based Breyer comes as the administration was cutting troops in LA from 300 to 100, according to the New York Times.
"Once again, a court has firmly rejected the president's attempt to make the National Guard a traveling national police force."
"Six months after they first federalized the California National Guard, defendants still retain control of approximately 300 guardsmen, despite no evidence that execution of federal law is impeded in any way—let alone significantly," the judge said. "What's more, defendants have sent California guardsmen into other states, effectively creating a national police force made up of state troops."
After ruling in September that Trump's deployment of Marines in Los Angeles violated the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act, the judge on Wednesday blocked the president's federalization of California National Guard troops—but he also halted his own decision until next Monday, allowing for appeals.
Despite the prospect that the Trump administration would continue the court fight, Bonta and Newsom—who is expected to run for president in 2028—welcomed the ruling.
"Once again, a court has firmly rejected the president's attempt to make the National Guard a traveling national police force," Bonta said in a statement. "For more than five months, the Trump administration has held California National Guard troops hostage as part of its political games."
"But the president is not king. And he cannot federalize the National Guard whenever, wherever, and for however long he wants, without justification," the attorney general declared. "This is a good day for our democracy and the strength of the rule of law."
In addition to battling Trump's invasion of LA, Bonta has backed lawsuits filed by Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul, Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield, and DC Attorney General Brian Schwalb challenging the president's deployments in their cities and filed an amicus brief with the US Supreme Court for the Chicago fight.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular