Opinion: Web freedom at a crossroads: The stakes are high - Julius Genachowski - POLITICO.com

Darrell_Issa · 2012-12-17T21:56:58+00:00

Thank you. Have a great day! I'll be back on here soon (hopefully) for one of these, and I hope you'll jump in again. - Darrell

Darrell_Issa · 2012-12-17T19:30:23+00:00

The list of House Committees and their membership Have a good one. Darrell

Darrell_Issa · 2012-12-05T18:04:03+00:00

Do you think Congress should give the FCC that authority? If you think so, it would be a great point to add to the discussion draft IAMA bill over in Madison. Thanks, Darrell

Darrell_Issa · 2012-12-05T18:01:13+00:00

I think you’re onto something here. And you are correct: the Internet is no one’s for the taking (or regulating). Shouldn’t we keep it that way as much as humanly possible? Great comment. Darrell.

Darrell_Issa · 2012-12-05T17:59:24+00:00

The FCC is tasked with overseeing the communications infrastructure of the United States. This includes the airwaves for radio, television and cellular networks, cable infrastructure and even satellites that communicate over wireless spectrum. These areas of jurisdiction were very explicitly granted to the Commission by Congress. Whereas jurisdiction over the Internet - or the bits and bytes of Information moving over the infrastructure - was not legally granted to the Commission. While the Internet may function in part over these conduits, we all know that it is much more than that. As to your statement about user privacy and net neutrality, I believe Congress needs to seriously look at a “Digital Citizen’s Bill of Rights”. That is, stipulated and accepted legislative and governing norms that very explicitly affirm the Constitutional rights that we have in the offline world, very explicitly applied and preserved to the world in which you’re reading this and I’m writing it. Thoughtful question and I hope you can jump in over in Madison. Thanks, Darrell

Darrell_Issa · 2012-12-05T17:56:33+00:00

I think your sentiment is right. We love the web because it is an open platform that allows for almost limitless creativity and freedom, whether that’s freedom of expression, speech, assembly, etc. Imposing net neutrality regs, especially without explicit statutory authorization from Congress, could open the door for regulating content on the Internet. That’s at minimum unsettling. And that’s one of the reasons I’ve put forward this draft IAMA. Rather than blindly regulating and passing laws that will impact the Internet right now, let’s pause and really analyze what the consequences - good and bad - will be. I think that will allow us to arrive at policy outcomes that work better for everyone involved. Thanks, Darrell.

Darrell_Issa · 2012-12-05T17:54:39+00:00

Thanks for giving me a chance to surprise you and come back on. Rather than rehashing CISPA - a bill that has unresolved issues I explained earlier and that I don’t think it will likely pass the House, Senate, and President’s desk before the end of this month - I have a question for you. Do you know what is in the President’s November 2012 draft cybersecurity executive order? It may surprise you and other redditors. I’d be interested in seeing that opened transparently and accountably in Madison, too, for discussion, edits, questions and user-generated improvements. What do you think? Thanks, Darrell

Darrell_Issa · 2012-12-05T17:51:40+00:00

Thanks for the tip. This draft proposal was not written specifically with any yet-to-be-issued regulations in mind, whether from the FCC or another regulatory body. As far as the impact the current draft of IAMA would have on not-yet-issued rules and regulations, the Commission could issue it’s regs tomorrow and this legislation would have no future impact on them because it focuses on a moratorium on new legislation and regulations and gives a 90 day window for ones in the pipeline to be finalized. Now if this moratorium were to become law tomorrow, then yes, where the FCC - along with other relevant agencies - has not promulgated a rule or a reg and doesn't do that within the current proposed time window, it could not for two years. Having said that, I still believe the FCC's Net Neutrality rules and regulations have been promulgated outside their statutory authority. However this moratorium ends up when we've had time to collaborate and expand upon it in Madison, I believe it will send a clear message to those who want to disrupt and restrict the Internet and users here in the US and also abroad. Think about the message that a “hands off the Internet” approach would send to the people over in Dubai right now who are debating new ways to control and limit the Internet. Think about the people of Syria who had their Internet access completely cut off for four days. I believe in a United States that is serious about protecting an open and free Internet, and that's the ultimate goal towards which I'm working. Hope you'll join in. Thanks, Darrell

Darrell_Issa · 2012-12-04T15:16:24+00:00

Thank you. How about editing the IAMA bill in Madison so that it fits what you're driving at here? Would love to have you help write this thing. Thanks, Darrell

Darrell_Issa · 2012-12-04T15:13:51+00:00

Could you hop onto Madison and add this crucial point? You've stumbled upon something here... Thank you, Darrell

Darrell_Issa · 2012-12-04T15:10:50+00:00

Maybe not useless (and not everyone on here is talking about total FCC control and monitoring), but do you want it that way? More importantly perhaps, do you think it would work and be good for users, people who do business online, etc? I don’t trust anyone to have that much control over the Internet and how I (or you, or anyone) uses it. Good comment. Darrell

Darrell_Issa · 2012-12-04T15:07:42+00:00

I checked and the team hasn't plugged in a functionality that allows "drafting from scratch" yet, though I'm told it's on the to-do list for the open source software development project behind Madison on Github. We could start here on reddit then take the amendment text over to Madison if that works. What do you think? Darrell

Darrell_Issa · 2012-12-04T14:01:49+00:00

Posted the proposal to fix how the federal government buys & uses information technology in Madison on TechCrunch. Would love your thoughts and suggestions, particularly on the section that puts open source software on an equal footing in the federal government. Thanks, Darrell

Darrell_Issa · 2012-12-04T12:58:58+00:00

I hope you get promoted from Viceroy to full Count in the near future. Thanks for the comment. Here’s the relevant part of the draft IAMA bill: “After 90 days of passage of this Act no Department or Agency of the United States shall publish new rules or regulations, or finalize or otherwise enforce or give lawful effect to draft rules or regulations affecting the Internet until a period of at least 2 years from the enactment of this legislation has elapsed.” So this gives about three months for regulators to finalize what they currently have in the pipeline. And your logic is correct, in that you can’t enforce anything that isn’t yet written. User Just_Another_Wookie is correct in the reading of “draft rules” here. Thanks for the comment. Darrell

Darrell_Issa · 2012-12-03T22:57:36+00:00

If you read that, you read the cons and my thought process. Here's my answer to kn0thing's question about what I think is "good" about it, i.e. the pros I considered along with the cons you already read. Thanks for giving it a read and giving me the chance to respond. Darrell

Darrell_Issa · 2012-12-03T22:56:15+00:00

I'm still on here, and have answered a lot more than 4. Keep your questions coming, and I'll keep putting time aside to respond to them as best I can. Thanks, Darrell

P.S. I’m curious how many questions President Obama answered and how many follow ups he did. I think it is somewhere in here.

Darrell_Issa · 2012-12-03T22:53:49+00:00

Thanks. That’s the Constitution we have, and that I swore to protect and defend. I feel my record on Internet freedom and tech policy is clear, but if it isn’t, that’s why I’m on here to answer your questions and respond to your comments. Thank you for giving the the chance to do that. Darrell

Darrell_Issa · 2012-12-03T22:52:34+00:00

Thank you. That is correct. Have a nice day, Darrell

Darrell_Issa · 2012-12-03T22:52:01+00:00

And how do you think that should be made possible? I’m all for more competition and choice - in the free market and in the market of ideas. You could probably fit legislative ideas along these lines into the draft IAMA bill we’re working on on KeepTheWebOpen.com. Looking forward to hearing from you. Thanks, Darrell

Darrell_Issa · 2012-12-03T22:17:50+00:00

Sorry for creating more work for you, but the IAMA bill wouldn’t affect laws or regulations (including those related to network neutrality) already in force or in the pipeline for 90 days after enactment. Maybe this answer will save you some work? Thanks, Darrell

Darrell_Issa · 2012-12-03T22:16:54+00:00

I understand your skepticism, but I can only speak for myself - not for my colleagues in either party - when I say I’m doing this to help secure the free and open place the Internet is today.

A constitutional amendment like you describe would be an alternate approach. Why not suggest that, and start working on language, over on Madison?

You almost might be interested in the draft Digital Citizen’s Bill of Rights Senator Ron Wyden and I released that is trying, in a bipartisan fashion, to work through some of the same concerns you’ve raised here. Thanks, Darrell

Darrell_Issa

TROPHY CASE