NEW HOUSE BILL--WHO WILL OWN INTERNET & ISP's

Thu, 17 May 2001 21:50:34 -0000

To You All,

This just came to me today. You might find it interesting and thought provoking. Is it maintaining our "Freedom and Privacy" or "relieving" us of our FREEDOMS and our PRIVACY?!?!?!

Subj: Konformist: Who Will Own the Internet? Date: 5/17/2001 1:13:16 PM Mountain Daylight Time From: eurekaph@juno.com (Fred Robinson) To: eurekaph@juno.com Please ACT on this! Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 23:49:24 -0700 Subject: Konformist: Who Will Own the Internet? THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT MESSAGE, PROBABLY WILL BE ON THE CONTROLLED NEWS MEDIA BY NEXT WEEK. WE NEED TO GET BUSY. BILL MONROE Please send as far and wide as possible. Thanks, Robert Sterling Editor, The Konformist http://www.konformist.com

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

This message was forwarded through the Red Rock Eater News Service (RRE). You are welcome to send the message along to others but please do not use the "redirect" option. For information about RRE, including instructions for (un)subscribing, see http://dlis.gseis.ucla.edu/people/pagre/rre.html

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Friday, May 11, 2001

Debra Sweezey <dsweezey@yahoo.com>

Telecom Act Nixed -- Feds Hand Bells the Net This is very likely to be a headline you'll read in next week's paper. When it happens -- and it is happening -- ISPs and CLECs are history, and monopolies rule again. You have just a few weeks to change tomorrow's history, and you have the world's greatest tool for change right at your fingertips.

Post notices on news groups, use your mailing list, chat, whatever, as long as you CALL FOR ACTION NOW! There is federal legislation that threatens to hand the Bells the Net. It is called H.R. 1542, misleadingly named the Broadband Relief Act of 2001. It is authored by two very powerful Congressmen, House Commerce Chairman W.J. "Billy" Tauzin (R-LA) and Ranking Minority Member John Dingell (D-MI), and supported - surprise, surprise, by only four companies. Perhaps you've heard of them: SBC, Verizon, Bell South and Qwest.

In essence, the bill allows the RBOCs to immediately begin offering long-distance data service, and eliminates the Telecom Act's requirement that they lease parts of their networks -- including equipment used for high-speed Internet service -- to competitors. Out goes the competition, up go the prices.

Share this information with your friends, family, customers, colleagues today! Beg them to make their voices heard. Do they really want the local phone monopoly running the Internet? Do they want higher prices, lousy service, and no new technology?

USISPA, the US Internet Service Providers Alliance, is comprised of ISPs and ISP state association across the country, and we are working in the trenches trying to protect consumers and the Internet from the Bell monopolies. We need your help in letting Congress know that what they're trying to do, on the Bells' dime, is not okay with America.

We willing and ready to help you any way we can. Please call or email Debra Sweezey of the US Internet Service Providers Alliance, and we'll give you all the information you need. We will give you the contact information for your local representative in addition to sample statements or letters, or we're happy to contact your representative on your behalf. Whatever's easiest for you. We hope you will join the fight for a free and open Internet. We need you!

This message comes to you through the United States Internet Service Providers Alliance (USISPA), an alliance of state ISP associations and ISP across the country working to ensure a fair and competitive open telecommunications environment nationwide. For more info or to find how you can help USISPA help you, email Debra Sweezey, Project Director for USISPA, at sweezey@usispa.org or call her at 202-326-0440. =====

April 24, 2001 Mr. TAUZIN (for himself, Mr. DINGELL, Mr. GOODLATTE, Mr. BOUCHER, Mr. ENGLISH, Mr. FROST, Mr. SMITH of Washington, Mr. LUCAS of Kentucky, Mr. WHITFIELD, Mr. MURTHA, Mr. COLLINS, Mr. BLAGOJEVICH, Mr. FOSSELLA, Mr. DICKS, Mr. GILLMOR, Mr. BARTON of Texas, Mr. KIND, Mr. GREENWOOD, Mr. MEEKS of New York, Mr. CAMP, Mr. BALDACCI, Mr. RAHALL, Mr. HOLDEN, Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York, Mr. BRADY of Pennsylvania, Mr. SIMPSON, Mr. BOYD, Mrs. NORTHUP, Mr. ENGEL, Mr. SANDLIN, Mr. EVERETT, Mr. BOEHNER, Mr. REYNOLDS, Mr. WELDON of Pennsylvania, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. BONIOR, Mr. MALONEY of Connecticut, Mr. BUYER, Mr. CUNNINGHAM, Mr. MCCRERY, Mr. BISHOP, Mr. LAMPSON, Mr. VITTER, Mr. BASS, Mr. ACKERMAN, Mr. BLUNT, Mr. MCHUGH, Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin, Mr. QUINN, Mr. BACA, Mr. GONZALEZ, Mr. BAKER, Mr. WALSH, Mr. GREEN of Texas, Mr. WEXLER, Mr. OXLEY, Mr. RADANOVICH, Mr. DIAZ-BALART, Mr. COOKSEY, Mr. CLEMENT, Mr. LARSEN of Washington, Mr. SCHROCK, Mr. PETRI, Mr. WATKINS, Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN, Mr. HILLIARD, Mr. OTTER, Mr. SHADEGG, Mr. BRYANT, Mr. PLATTS, Mr. PUTNAM, Mr. CUMMINGS, Mr. RODRIGUEZ, Mr. CONDIT, Mr. BURR of North Carolina, and Mr. WYNN) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce A BILL To deregulate the Internet and high speed data services, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

(a) FINDINGS- Congress finds the following:
    (1) Internet access services are inherently interstate and international in nature, and should therefore not be subject to regulation by the States.
    (2) The imposition of regulations by the Federal Communications Commission and the States has impeded the rapid delivery of high speed Internet access services to the public, thereby reducing consumer choice and welfare.
    (3) The Telecommunications Act of 1996 represented a careful balance between the need to open up local telecommunications markets to competition and the need to increase competition in the provision of interLATA voice telecommunications services.
    (4) In enacting the prohibition on Bell operating company provision of interLATA services, Congress recognized that certain telecommunications services have characteristics that render them incompatible with the prohibition on Bell operating company provision of interLATA services, and exempted such services from the interLATA prohibition.
    (5) High speed data services and Internet access services constitute unique markets that are likewise incompatible with the prohibition on Bell operating company provision of interLATA services.
    (6) Since the enactment of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the Federal Communications Commission has construed the prohibition on Bell operating company provision of interLATA services in a manner that hasimpeded the development of advanced telecommunications services, thereby limiting consumer choice and welfare.
    (7) Internet users should have choice among competing Internet service providers.
    (8) Internet service providers should have the right to interconnect with high speed data networks in order to provide service to Internet      users.
(b) PURPOSES- It is therefore the purpose of this Act to provide market incentives for the rapid delivery of advanced telecommunications services--
    (1) by deregulating high speed data services and Internet access services;
    (2) by clarifying that the prohibition on Bell operating company provision of interLATA services does not extend to the provision of high speed data services and Internet access services;
    (3) by ensuring that consumers can choose among competing Internet service providers; and
    (4) by ensuring that Internet service providers can interconnect with competitive high speed data networks in order to provide Internet access service to the public.

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS

(a) AMENDMENTS-

Section 3 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 153) is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraph (20) as paragraph (21);
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (21) through (52) as paragraphs (24) through (54), respectively;
(3) by inserting after paragraph (19) the following new paragraph:
    (20) HIGH SPEED DATA SERVICE- The term `high speed data service means any service that consists of or includes the offering of a capability to transmit, using a packet-switched or successor technology, information at a rate that is generally not less than 384 kilobits per second in at least one direction. ;
(4) by inserting after paragraph (22) the following new paragraphs:
    `(23) INTERNET- The term `Internet means collectively the myriad of computer and telecommunications facilities, including equipment and operating software, which comprise the interconnected world-wide network of networks that employ the Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol, or any predecessor or successor protocols to such protocol, to communicate information of all kinds by wire or radio.
    (24) INTERNET ACCESS SERVICE- The term `Internet access service means
        (A) a service that combines computer processing, information storage, protocol conversion, and routing with transmission to enable users to access Internet content and services, and
        (B) the transmission of such service, but does not include the portion of such transmission from the user to the provider of such service. .
            (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS- (1) Section 230(f) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 230 (f)) is amended--
                (A) by striking paragraph (1); and
                (B) by redesignating paragraphs two(2) through four(4) as paragraphs one(1) through three(3), respectively. (2) Section 223(h)(2) of such Act (47 U.S.C. 223(h)(2)) is amended by striking 230(f)(2) and inserting 230(f)(1) . SEC. 4. LIMITATION ON AUTHORITY TO REGULATE HIGH SPEED DATA SERVICES.
        (a) IN GENERAL- Part I of title II of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following new section: SEC. 232. PROVISION OF HIGH SPEED DATA SERVICES. (a) FREEDOM FROM REGULATION- Except to the extent that high speed data service and Internet access service are expressly referred to in this Act, neither the Commission, nor any State, shall have authority to regulate the rates, charges, terms, or conditions for, or entry into the provision of, any high speed data service or Internet access service, or to regulate the facilities used in the provision of either such service.
        (b) SAVINGS PROVISION- Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit or affect the authority of any State to regulate voice telephone exchangeservices, nor affect the rights of cable franchise authorities to establish requirements that are otherwise consistent with this Act.
        (c) CONTINUED ENFORCEMENT OF ESP EXEMPTION, UNIVERSAL SERVICE RULES PERMITTED- Nothing in this section shall affect the ability of theCommission to retain or modify--
            (1) the exemption from interstate access charges for enhanced service providers under Part 69 of the Commission s Rules; or
            (2) rules issued pursuant to section 254.-(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT- Section 251 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 251) is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new subsection: (j) EXEMPTION- 1) IN GENERAL- Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (c) and (d), the Commission shall not require an incumbent local exchange carrier to--
                (A) provide unbundled access to any network elements used in the provision of any high speed data service, other than those network elements described in section 51.319 of the Commission s regulations (47 C.F.R. 51.319), as in effect on January 1, 1999; or
                (B) offer for resale at wholesale rates any high speed data service. (2) AUTHORITY TO REDUCE ELEMENTS SUBJECT TO REQUIREMENT- Paragraph (1)(A) shall not prohibit the Commission from modifying the regulation referred to in that paragraph to reduce the number of network elements subject to the unbundling requirement, or to forbear from enforcing any portion of that regulation in accordance with the Commission s authority under section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, notwithstanding any limitation on that authority in section 10 of this Act.-
SEC. 5. INTERNET CONSUMERS FREEDOM OF CHOICE.
Part I of title II of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended by section 4, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:
SEC. 233. INTERNET CONSUMERS FREEDOM OF CHOICE.
    (a) PURPOSE- It is the purpose of this section to ensure that Internet users have freedom of choice of Internet service provider.
    (b) OBLIGATIONS OF INCUMBENT LOCAL EXCHANGE CARRIERS- Each incumbent local exchange carrier has the duty to provide--
        (1) Internet users with the ability to subscribe to and have access to any Internet service provider that interconnects with such carrier s high speed data service;
        (2) any Internet service provider with the right to acquire the facilities and services necessary to interconnect with such carrier s high speed data service for the provision of Internet access service; and
        (3) any Internet service provider with the ability to collocate equipment in accordance with the provisions of section 251, to the extent necessary to achieve the objectives of paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection.
        (c) DEFINITIONS- As used in this section--
            (1) INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDER- The term `Internet service provider means any provider of Internet access service.
            (2) INCUMBENT LOCAL EXCHANGE CARRIER- The term incumbent local exchange carrier has the same meaning as provided in section 251(h). .

SEC. 6. INCIDENTAL INTERLATA PROVISION OF HIGH SPEED DATA AND INTERNET ACCESS SERVICES. (a) INCIDENTAL INTERLATA SERVICE PREMITTED- Section 271(g) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 271(g)) is amended--
(1) by striking `or at the end of paragraph (5);
(2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (6) and inserting `; or ; and
(3) by adding at the end thereof the following new paragraph: `
(7) of high speed data service or Internet access service. .
(b) PROHIBITION ON MARKETING VOICE SERVICES- Section 271 of such Act is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new subsection:
    (k) PROHIBITION ON MARKETING VOICE TELEPHONE SERVICES- Until the date on which a Bell operating company is authorized to offer interLATA services originating in an in-region State in accordance with the provisions of this section, such Bell operating company offering any high speed data service or Internet access service pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (7) of subsection (g) may not, in such in-region State market, bill, or collect for interLATA voice telecommunications service obtained by means of the high speed data service or Internet access service provided by such company. .
(c) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS- (1) Section 272(a)(2)(B)(i) of such Act is amended to read as follows:
    (i) incidental interLATA services described in paragraphs (1), (2), (3), (5), (6), and (7) of section 271(g). .
    (2) Section 272(a)(2)(C) of such Act is repealed. Black is white and white is black. Deregulation is monopoly. Freedom of choice is the lack of such freedom. This is how Congress presents legislation. http://community.webtv.net/Save CherryHill/AkerRGICorporate If you are interested in a free subscription to The Konformist Newswire, please visit: http://www.eGroups.com/list/konformist Or, e-mail konformist-subscribe@egroups.com with the subject: "I NEED 2 KONFORM!!!" (Okay, you can use something else, but it's a kool catch phrase.) Visit the Klub Konformist at Yahoo!: http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/klubkonformist Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/