dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
story category
Obama Nominates New FCC Commissioner
Carriers pleased, though progressives worry about close AT&T ties...
by Karl Bode 12:00PM Friday May 01 2009
The President has announced the appointment of Mignon Clyburn to the FCC. Clyburn is a commissioner on the South Carolina Public Service Commission and the daughter of Representative James Clyburn (D-SC), who has a history of voting against network neutrality. Clyburn brings some interesting expertise to the FCC, as before her stint as a South Carolina regulator, she was publisher and general manager of the Coastal Times, a weekly newspaper in Charleston, from 1984 to 1998. Verizon for one seems pretty happy with the pick:
quote:
"Commissioner Clyburn is a well-qualified candidate, and her experience will be a welcomed asset as the commission moves forward with the critical work of developing the right policies to achieve the full potential and benefits of broadband. We look forward to working with her."
The National Cable & Telecommunications Association also approves her "pragmatism":
quote:
We congratulate Ms. Clyburn on her nomination and look forward to working with her on the important issues before the FCC," said NCTA President Kyle McSlarrow. "As a long-time member of the South Carolina Public Service Commission, Mignon Clyburn brings an insightful and pragmatic perspective to the complex policy issues that the FCC is tackling in today's dynamic telecommunications environment. Ms. Clyburn's extensive experience with intergovernmental groups such as NARUC will make her an invaluable asset to the Commission."
Progressives are wary, however. Art Brodsky of Public Knowledge suggests that Clyburn has a history of being very cozy with AT&T, according to incumbent competitors in the Carolinas:
quote:
As one telecom attorney with experience in southern state put it, if a competitive carrier went to the South Carolina commission to argue that the sky was blue, and AT&T (the former BellSouth) argued the sky was purple, the PSC would rule in favor of purple. The Bell companies have an unrivaled story of success in the South Carolina regulatory system and legislature, as they do in many southern states.
The New America Foundation's (heavily funded by Google) Sascha Meinrath shares similar concerns:
quote:
The dominant feeling is that she is extremely tight with the telecom incumbents and that having her on the FCC will all but ensure a stalemate that will prevent any meaningful telecom reforms from being passed. To me, this seems strange since so many of us on the Technology, Media, & Telecom advisory committee during the campaign were looking forward to much needed and innovative reforms once the new FCC was in place.
Given the FCC already has the reputation of an agency that believes AT&T and Verizon (not the public) are their primary constituents, Clyburn may not bring the kind of progressive shift at the FCC many are hoping for. Of course the jury will remain out until new FCC boss Julius Genachowski sees Congressional approval, a full FCC gets stocked and seated, and the revamped commission starts showing us exactly what they're made of.


159 comments .. click to read

Recommended comments




pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

2 recommendations

reply to amigo_boy

Re: Fixed the statement.

said by amigo_boy:

I think the standard response is that they wouldn't try to kill us if we didn't support Israel (who is trying to kill Arabs living in Palestine).
You probably know this already but I am sure most others reading this do not.

Muslim terrorists have been attacking US interests since 1785. Israel has been a friend since 1948. The math is quite simple IMO.
--
Blagojevich / Madoff 2012!

amigo_boy

join:2005-07-22

1 edit

4 recommendations

reply to NOCMan
said by NOCMan:

people should learn the truth before saying Israel is defending themselves.

»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine
Actually, everyone should learn *a lot* about the middle east before taking a side for (or against) Israel, Palestinians, etc.

The entire region was controlled by the Turks for 400 years. Muslims denying independence to Muslims. There were no political boundaries. Just "the arab territories."

Prince Faisal worked with the British to overthrow the Turks during WWI. He was rewarded with the area today known as Saudi Arabia. He wasn't elected by the people of that area.

Faisal was forced out by the house of Saud who did very little in the war against the Turks. Prince Saud wasn't elected by the people of that area. And, the British didn't do anything to restore the political dominion they gave Faisal.

Faisal was elected to lead Syria. But, the French didn't like it. They forced him out. His son (Abdullah) marched with men to resist the French. They were stopped by the British and he was given Trans Jordan. The people of that area didn't vote for him.

Meanwhile, King Faisal was exiled to England. A few years later the British installed him as king of Iraq. The people of that region didn't vote for him.

And then there are the Arab Emirates. How do you think those royal families came by their political fortunes? Nobody voted for them. In fact, Saddam had a legitimate argument that Kuwait belonged to Iraq. His complaint (that the British usurped the rightful ownership by giving it to a family as a political favor) was just as valid as the Palestinian complaint that nobody had the right to give their land to the Jews.

The entire region's history is of arbitrary political boundaries and appointments. The French and British were given "mandates" by the League of Nations (predecessor to the United Nations) to administer the area and essentially create political boundaries (and rulers) that never existed.

Palestine was just another one. Jews already lived there, buying their land when there were huge influxes during the Russian pograms of the late 1800s and early 1900s.

The British (Balfour) proposed a partitioned Palestine. Even King Faisal even approved of it. (He later rejected it, perhaps because the British didn't help him against the House of Saud.). The League of Nations accepted it. And, the United Nations accepted it.

Everyone accepted it... except the Palestinians (who were under Jordanian rule, and Jordan's King Abdullah had no intention of granting them statehood, nor Jordanians generally the right to vote him out of office).

For 25 years Jews essentially had no willing partner to accept the internationally-agreed "dual state." On May 14, 1948 the British "Mandate" expired. On that day, there was no one to administer the area of Palestine. No government.

Jews had no choice but to unilaterally accept the international agreement, or essentially live without government. This was *after* 25 years of Jews immigrating there because of the international agreement.

Like so many things in life, the only way to resolve the conflict was through war. The Jews won. And, the Palestinians attacked them 3 more times over the following 20 years. (Inviting their neighbors onto their land to help the attack.).

So, Palestinians can't accept that they gambled and lost. They rejected the international plan. They resorted to war. Lost. Lost three more times. But, all we hear is how they're denied the statehood they rejected for 90 years.

It's like they want an endless opportunity for "do overs." Forget that they rejected the international plan. Forget that they resorted to war 3-4 times (and lost). They just keep saying their denied what most of the muslim mid-east world is denied (self-determination) due to an arbitrarily-created political boundary (which describes most of the muslim mid-east). And, they reserve the right to use war -- which they've used a number of times and lost.

The whole thing is messed up. But, the only difference between Palestine and the rest of the mid-east is that it's no muslims oppressing muslims, denying self determination, etc. If Israel didn't exist, Palestinians would be under Jordanian control (as they were until 30 years ago), and denied "statehood" just like Jordanians are (having been placed under the control of Faisal's family).

Mark


Matt3
All noise, no signal.
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12

2 recommendations

reply to S_engineer
said by S_engineer:

Name 3 things in this broad agenda that have "Bi-partisan" co-operation.
Nothing, because the Republicans are too busy coining ridiculous terms and labeling everything socialism while bashing their own party members who agree with the President.


S_engineer
Premium
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL

2 recommendations

reply to Matt3
Your going to see alot more picks like this. This is purely political, and not in the best interest of the nation. Just what did you expect when you voted for change???

moonpuppy

join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD

4 recommendations

reply to Matt3
said by Matt3:

I support Obama but this pick baffles me. She was up against many, MANY, more qualified candidates and SC isn't exactly a "progressive" state, in regards to anything. Her brief stint at the SC PUC and career as a journalist before that even further confuses me. I do not think she is in any way whatsoever qualified to hold this position.
If anyone had the idea Obama would radically change how government works, it is all but clear they were duped.

Hope and Change not found.


Matt3
All noise, no signal.
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12

1 edit

2 recommendations

reply to NOCMan
said by NOCMan:

"Commissioner Clyburn is a well-qualified candidate, and her experience will be a welcomed asset as the commission moves forward with the critical work of developing the right policies to achieve the full profit potential and benefits of broadband. We look forward to working with her now and in the future after her term with the FCC."
I support Obama but this pick baffles me. She was up against many, MANY, more qualified candidates and SC isn't exactly a "progressive" state, in regards to anything. Her brief stint at the SC PUC and career as a journalist before that even further confuses me. I do not think she is in any way whatsoever qualified to hold this position.


drslash
Goya Asma
Premium
join:2002-02-18
Marion, IA

3 recommendations

Tax bill

What does she owe for back taxes?


dcurrey
Premium
join:2004-06-29

2 recommendations

More of the same!

Need I say more.