May, 16 2018, 12:00am EDT
In Big Win for Open-Internet Advocates, Senate Votes to Undo 2017 Net Neutrality Repeal
On Wednesday, the Senate voted 52-47 in favor of a resolution of disapproval that would overturn the Federal Communications Commission's unpopular 2017 repeal of Net Neutrality protections.
The resolution, introduced by Massachusetts Sen. Ed Markey, would roll back the rule change, set to take effect June 11, and restore internet-user safeguards that prevented broadband providers like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon from blocking, throttling or otherwise manipulating online content.
WASHINGTON
On Wednesday, the Senate voted 52-47 in favor of a resolution of disapproval that would overturn the Federal Communications Commission's unpopular 2017 repeal of Net Neutrality protections.
The resolution, introduced by Massachusetts Sen. Ed Markey, would roll back the rule change, set to take effect June 11, and restore internet-user safeguards that prevented broadband providers like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon from blocking, throttling or otherwise manipulating online content.
The measure now moves to the House of Representatives, where an identical resolution, sponsored by Pennsylvania Rep. Mike Doyle, already has more than 160 co-sponsors.
Today's successful Senate vote follows weeks of grassroots activism spearheaded by Free Press Action Fund, Fight for the Future and Demand Progress -- the groups behind the Team Internet organizing effort and BattlefortheNet.com. Last week, the groups raised an internet-wide "red alert" as activists, major web companies, online forums and small businesses used their sites to drive constituent calls and emails to lawmakers ahead of the Senate vote.
Net Neutrality protections have broad bipartisan support among voters across the country. An April 2018 University of Maryland poll showed 82 percent of Republicans and 90 percent of Democrats oppose FCC Chairman Ajit Pai's decision to repeal the Title II open-internet protections his predecessor put in place. Several other public polls show a consistent pattern of support among Republicans, Democrats and independents.
Free Press Action Fund President and CEO Craig Aaron made the following statement:
"Today the Senate has taken a giant step toward unwinding the least-popular policy decision in the history of the FCC. The Senate vote is a historic win for supporters of Net Neutrality and a stinging rebuke to the army of phone- and cable-company lobbyists and lackeys trying to take away our internet freedom.
"Net Neutrality rules protect everyone's right to a free and open internet. They safeguard free expression and choice, ensuring that people can start their own businesses, make their own media, further their education and fight for racial justice without fear of discrimination. That's why so many people from across the political spectrum pushed their lawmakers to support this resolution -- and the public pressure will only intensify as this measure moves to the House.
"We need to know whether our elected officials stand with the public in support of Net Neutrality or with greedy phone and cable companies that seek to sell off our online rights. We'll be taking careful note of where each member stands and won't stop advocating for Net Neutrality until the rights of all internet users are restored."
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
Trump’s Lax Approach to Antitrust Helps Spur Banner Year for Corporate Mergers
"Trump’s new antitrust enforcers have demonstrated a willingness to facilitate dealmaking through an uptick in early terminations and settlements," said the American Economic Liberties Project.
Dec 26, 2025
Global corporate mergers surged to near-record highs in 2025, driven in part by US President Donald Trump's lax approach to antitrust enforcement.
The Financial Times reported on Friday that global dealmaking in 2025 topped $4 trillion, including 68 mergers worth $10 billion or more, highlighted by Netflix's $72 billion bid to buy Warner Bros. Discovery and a proposed $85 billion mega-merger between railway giants Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern.
The US alone accounted for $2.3 trillion worth of mergers and acquisitions, which the Financial Times said highlighted the Trump administration's role in green-lighting corporate consolidation.
"Top dealmakers said that the Trump administration’s push to loosen regulation had encouraged companies to explore tie-ups that they might otherwise have been hesitant to pursue," the Financial Times explained.
Andrew Nussbaum, co-chair of the executive committee at law firm Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, told the Financial Times that corporate leaders "see a willingness of the regulators to engage in constructive dialogue" under the second Trump administration, which has given them "a willingness to take on regulatory risk for transactions that are strategic."
The American Economic Liberties Project has also taken note of the Trump administration's role in shepherding through big mergers, and created a Trump Merger Boom tracker earlier this year to document the massive wave of corporate consolidation.
In its analysis of the administration's lax approach to antitrust enforcement, the American Economic Liberties Project said that "Trump’s new antitrust enforcers have demonstrated a willingness to facilitate dealmaking through an uptick in early terminations and settlements."
"Despite pro-enforcement rhetoric early on from Trump’s heads of the FTC and DOJ Antitrust Division," the American Economic Liberties Project added, "it’s becoming increasingly clear that agency leadership is having trouble making their decisions in a vacuum—with a quiet tide of deals granted to companies that have been friendly to the White House."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Lina Khan ‘Scouring New York City Laws’ to Help Zohran Mamdani Drive Down Prices
Khan and members of her team are reportedly "dusting off a little-used 1960s price-gouging statute" in an effort to bolster the mayor-elect's affordability push in New York City.
Dec 26, 2025
Former Federal Trade Commission chair and antitrust trailblazer Lina Khan is reportedly poring over New York City's laws to help Democratic Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani fulfill the central promise of his campaign: making the metropolis more affordable.
According to the New York Times, Khan—in her capacity as co-chair of the mayor-elect's transition team—"has spent weeks scouring New York City’s laws to find dormant or underused mayoral authority that could allow Mr. Mamdani to take action in a hurry."
Potential actions "include specific attempts to drive down apartment rental fees and utility costs and compel businesses to be more transparent about pricing," as well as "dusting off a little-used 1960s price-gouging statute and policing new protections for food delivery workers," the Times reported, citing three unnamed people familiar with internal discussions.
As head of the FTC under former President Joe Biden, Khan took groundbreaking legal action against major corporations such as Amazon and, in the words of one antitrust advocacy group, "reinvigorated enforcement of the Robinson-Patman Act, a long-dormant law designed to prevent price discrimination by big corporations, through two separate cases against PepsiCo and Southern Glazer’s—major victories for smaller and independent businesses."
Khan, according to the Times, hopes to spur similar action in New York City. Members of her team, which includes former federal regulators, have "studied a 1969 consumer protection law meant to prohibit 'unconscionable' business tactics, to potentially target hospitals and sports stadiums where consumers typically have little choice but to pay high prices for products that are cheaper elsewhere."
Additionally, the newspaper reported, "they have looked at whether food delivery companies, which wield significant power in the city, are complying with laws that protect their drivers, and whether landlords are complying with a newly enacted law barring many real estate brokers from collecting thousands of dollars in fees."
Douglas Farrar, a spokesman for Khan, told the Times that the former FTC chair and her team have "worked closely" with the Mamdani transition "to provide key research support on ideas for hitting the ground running."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Bezos-Owned Newspaper Bashes Medicare for All in Christmas Day Editorial
The Washington Post editorial predictably ignores research showing that a single-payer system would save hundreds of billions of dollars—and tens of thousands of lives—each year.
Dec 26, 2025
An editorial published on Christmas by the Jeff Bezos-owned Washington Post inveighed against supporters of Medicare for All in the United States, pointing to the struggles of Britain's chronically underfunded National Health Service as a "cautionary tale" while ignoring research showing that a single-payer system would save the US hundreds of billions of dollars and tens of thousands of lives each year.
The editorial, headlined "Socialized medicine can’t survive the winter," laments the "religious-like devotion to the NHS" in the United Kingdom even as "hospital corridors overflow and routine procedures get canceled due to a catastrophic event commonly known as 'winter.'"
The Post editorial board, led by opinion editor Adam O'Neal, waves away expert analyses showing that the UK government is underinvesting in its healthcare system relative to other countries in Europe, resulting in the kinds of problems the Thursday editorial attributed to the supposedly inherent flaws of single-payer systems.
"This is the dark reality of single-payer and a cautionary tale for the third of Americans who mistakenly believe Medicare for All is a good idea," the editorial declared ominously.
The editorial understates Medicare for All's popularity among US voters. A recent Data for Progress survey found that even after hearing common opposing arguments, 58% of voters strongly or somewhat support improving Medicare and expanding it to cover everyone in the US.
A separate poll conducted by GQR Research found that 54% of voters nationally, and 56% in battleground districts, support Medicare for All. US Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), the co-leader of the Medicare for All Act in the House, is reportedly planning to present those findings to colleagues next month as she pushes Democrats to rally behind her legislation ahead of the critical midterm elections.
Welcome to the newest co-sponsors of my Medicare for All bill in the House!
Medicare for All is not only good policy — as premiums skyrocket for millions of Americans — it is incredibly popular. Let’s keep building momentum for universal health care and get this passed! pic.twitter.com/k5sg7hEkYR
— Rep. Pramila Jayapal (@RepJayapal) December 25, 2025
The renewed push for Medicare for All comes as the corporate-dominated healthcare status quo hits Americans with massive premium hikes stemming from congressional Republicans' refusal to extend Affordable Care Act tax credits.
Predictably, the Post's editorial board—which Bezos has instructed to write "every day in support and defense of two pillars: personal liberties and free markets"—neglected to mention the myriad horrors of the United States' for-profit system in its diatribe against Medicare for All.
The editorial also ignores research showing potentially massive benefits from a transition to Medicare for All, which would virtually eliminate private insurance while providing comprehensive coverage to everyone in the US for free at the point of service.
One study published in The Lancet estimated that a Medicare for All system would save more than 68,000 lives and over $450 billion in healthcare expenditures annually.
An analysis by Yale researchers calculated that "if the US had had a single-payer universal healthcare system in 2020"—which marked the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic—"nearly 212,000 American lives would have been saved that year" and "the country would have saved $105 billion in Covid-19 hospitalization expenses alone."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular