Here’s a ‘shocking surprise’ for Texas readers. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas) is basically for whatever Internet Service Providers want when it comes to administering and charging for broadband service. In a letter to Stop the Cap! reader Milan that confuses “Internet Overcharging,” the practice of throwing usage caps/limits or imposing consumption based billing on customers, with “Net Neutrality,” which guarantees that all network traffic is treated equally, Hutchison signals her opposition to government intervention in any of it.
Bizarrely, Hutchison claims that “congressionally mandated treatment of data” would “stifle competition” and “decrease incentive for [upgrades].” That’s a logic train wreck. How exactly telling a provider that they must treat data across their network equally would suddenly signal a potential competitor to throw in the towel escapes me. If a provider is given the power to discriminate against traffic he or she doesn’t own, control, or partner with, the incentive to upgrade will never benefit the independent traffic anyway.
Apparently allowing providers to manage congestion on their networks the way they see fit is the only way consumers will be protected from “reduced speeds” and “higher costs.” Yet many consumers already are faced with slower speeds created by providers who are decreasing investment in their own networks, despite earning continued healthy profits from them. Consumer costs are increasing with or without Net Neutrality, and as consumers who were to be subjected to Time Warner Cable’s “experiment” with consumption based billing discovered, a $50 monthly broadband bill would have increased to $150 a month for an equivalent level of service.
The one clear fact of life Senator Hutchison either doesn’t realize or chooses to ignore is that consumers are the victims of America’s special interest-serving telecommunications policy she and other members of Congress helped put into place, assuring most Americans of anything but healthy competition. Most Americans face a duopoly – one cable and one telephone company for broadband access. Often, services from those two providers are not equivalent in terms of speed and performance, much less availability.
Competition is to be applauded, but using the word in a sentence does not provide Americans with assurances of getting it. Forward thinking telecommunications policy promotes a true open market, investigates providers that refuse to overbuild into each others’ territories, demands robust oversight and regulation when necessary, and guarantees that no provider has the power to discriminate against traffic carried over that network, particularly when that traffic represents a competitive threat.
We’ve seen the results of the highly uncompetitive broadband marketplace most consumers, particularly in rural areas, face. It originates from policies that always benefit the providers first and foremost, while allowing the United States to continue to fall behind in broadband rankings measuring availability of fast, affordable, reliable and open broadband service. Continuing with these policies only assures providers get ahead while leaving you and I behind.
Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison:
Dear Friend:
Thank you for contacting me regarding equal and unrestricted access to the Internet. I welcome your thoughts and comments on this issue.
The Internet is a valuable tool that facilitates business, education, and recreation for millions of Americans.
In 2008, an estimated 220 million Americans had access to the Internet at home or work. As Ranking Member of the Senate Commerce Committee, I am committed to ensuring that consumers benefit from competition in the telecommunications industry, resulting in lower prices, improved service, and access to 21st century technology.
Instrumental to the success of the Internet is the longstanding policy of keeping the Internet as free as possible from burdensome regulations. Increased investment in upgrading and expanding America’s Internet infrastructure, as well as innovative new broadband networks, will ensure that all Americans have access to affordable high-speed Internet. However, intensified regulation of the Internet, such as congressionally mandated treatment of data, would stifle competition and would decrease the incentive for network operators to invest in the Internet infrastructure.
It is my concern that mandates that prevent network providers from managing congestion on the Internet will reduce service speeds for many users, and eliminate a valuable tool for ensuring the most efficient use of network pipelines, resulting in increased costs to the consumer.
In a June 2007 report on the issue of “network neutrality”, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) stated that no “demonstrated consumer harm from conduct by broadband providers” had occurred due to network providers managing Internet traffic.
More recently, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued a decision involving Comcast and certain network management practices. While this decision works its way through the courts, Congress may continue reviewing network practices and Internet congestion issues.
Should any legislation regarding Internet access come before the Senate Commerce Committee, you may be assured I will keep your views in mind. I appreciate hearing from you, and I hope that you will not hesitate to keep in touch on any issue of concern to you.
Sincerely,
Kay Bailey Hutchison
United States Senator
284 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
202-224-5922 (tel)
202-224-0776 (fax)
The media calls corporate shills “moderates”
So what do you expect from a Repulican from Texas?
Remember this is not a partisan issue. Here in NC it was the Democrats spouting the same junk. It is typical of many politicians taking up an issue that is merely opposite of another group to draw in sympathy. It is a typical tactic many use. To me it seems lazy. The one here let TW pretty much write *his* bill. Lazy… Remember net neutrality is the other side of the coin to over charging. Charge the providers of the data and then turn around and double charge the users of the data. All in the name of its ‘their… Read more »
Does anyone hear think this is not the way governments works now or in the past? Pick one…Billions in the lobby pig trough or a couple of thousand from a politically small public. Net neutrality goes to the highest bidder. I would love to see the backbone and isp’s separated. Backbones would need to keep prices in check to attract new isp’s. Older isp’s be damned… join in of die. If their not on the backbone your going to spend a lot of time typing to yourself. I like Texas a lot. I looked forward to visiting there and never… Read more »
“Bizarrely, Hutchison claims that “congressionally mandated treatment of data” would “stifle competition” and “decrease incentive for [upgrades].””
WTH? What does she think is going nowadays without those caps in place? Looks to me like things are just fine without caps.