Legislation 2.0: Conversation So Far

by: Matt Stoller

Tue Jul 24, 2007 at 09:04

It's a good day to blog broadband with Senator Durbin, who will be coming onto the site at 7pm tonight. Yesterday was the Youtube/CNN debate where citizens had input into the process. And this morning at 9:30am, the House subcommittee on telecom is holding hearings on oversight of the FCC, which in the wake of Google's stunning spectrum bid have taken on added importance. You can watch the hearings on streaming video here.

The response to Senator Durbin's offer has been remarkable. Jason Lee Miller reported on the effort at WebProNews, and we have a diverse and compelling group coming onto the site (and on their own sites) to give input into this discussion today. Here's a round-up of what's already been said.

Matt Stoller :: Legislation 2.0: Conversation So Far

Markos of Dailykos, telecom expert David Isenberg of Isenblog, and Illinois blogger Archpundit are interested to see how this experiment plays out, while Jeff Nolan, a former venture capitalist for Software Giant SAP, wants to know why we need a national broadband strategy. Carpetbagger Report has a good response - America has fallen far behind in broadband penetration because of a poor regulatory framework and corporate capture. Much of the conversation so far off of Durbin's initial post has actually focused on net neutrality and the structural separation of the physical and content/application layers. There's a bit of trust lacking in terms of letting the telecom and cable companies own the network and sell the content.

Other mentions include From Poverty to Opportunity Campaign (more info here), RSS - Regulations, Statutes and Standards, Life on the Wicked Stag, Inclusion, Campaigns of the Future, and Working Assets, where Durbin is a customer.

Finally, Art Brodsky at Public Knowledge and IP Democracy are intrigued but skeptical:

But Durbin's experiment - namely calling on the wisdom of the web crowd to craft legislation - may, in the end, prove to be a passing thing. He's fighting the well-entrenched industries who run the country's broadband networks and he's fighting, well, the nature of political power itself. Legislation rarely reflects the ideal policy approach to any topic and almost always reflect rank, raw political power by special interests. It's hard to see how a sweet experiment could stand up to hundreds, if not thousands, of years of lawmaking.

On the other hand, there have been good laws and programs created at some point in the last thousand years.

Tags: Dick Durbin, open legislation, broadband, net neutrality, legislation 2.0, (All Tags)

Print Friendly View

Send As Email

Legislation 2.0: Conversation So Far | 5 comments

Raw Political Power (0.00 / 0)

This may a bit naÃ¯ve, but isnâ??t it possible that this is a raw political power struggle that the telecoâ??s are facing due to a weakening position. I do not see how the cynical view of this disregards Durbinâ??s bold move. Many corporate interests are at least in play for this brief window due to the fact that they by and large laid down with the Republican party which is now in such a weak position that the only raw political power they have left is to continue a phenomenally unpopular war and to block Democratic legislation (which itself is showing slight cracks ala SCHIP).

The telecoâ??s are not pushing sound policy, and while the recent history of corporate America, and probably the long view favors them, coming to the Blogosphere for policy suggestion actually seems like a potentially powerful move.

by: BrianK @ Tue Jul 24, 2007 at 09:48:12 AM CDT

This (0.00 / 0)

actually got my tech nerd father to leave a comment. This topic is something we have discussed a number of times over the years. While he has other outlets to regulators, this is the first time he got to speak directly to a Senator.

by: Julia Rosen @ Tue Jul 24, 2007 at 11:50:53 AM CDT

Fighting Entrenched Industries (0.00 / 0)

Of course it is difficult to fight entrenched industries, but it is possible. Senator Durbin is on the right track. Thank you for your work on this.

by: Mike Chapman @ Tue Jul 24, 2007 at 12:01:21 PM CDT

... (0.00 / 0)

Copps hit everything right on the head, public safety to fixing existing spectrum problems as well as set forth open rules and open meetings, heck even the SCOTUS and the FOMC put out audio/text transcripts. Props to the one congressman who brought up application choice, Apple iTunes vs. a possible Nokia service (guess which will work on which phones?).

The questions were a bit weak overall though, It is a small chunk of spectrum open access is being tried on, and you can't explain away the wireless broadband deficit compared with other countries without assigning blame to the existing carriers. More questions along those lines would've been good. Martin does seem to get it though. With portable devices and software some of today's MVNO's could get away with just offering software packages for normal phones. Recovering costs for being an MVNO are never easier than being the network owner unless you can offer some serious added value, probably with unique software and devices, which can/should becoming common features of a open access network as is. I'm not sure wholesale access would do any good if the network owner is a bad operator. Google might do the right thing, but another operator could easily half-ass it and end up creating a bigger problem.

Wholesale would be awesome if the network owner did it right.

Free the iPhone

by: audi100quattro @ Tue Jul 24, 2007 at 12:32:27 PM CDT