Anti-Competitive Wireless Measures Buried in Payroll Tax Buried Amendments Take Aim at Competitors, White Spaces Michael Weinberg over at Public Knowledge points out that several awful amendments are being shoveled into the upcoming Payroll Tax bill that could significantly impact wireless broadband. The FCC's current network neutrality rules (at Google and Verizon request), don't really cover net neutrality, and one amendment by Representative Marsha Blackburn would ensure neutrality rules could never be applied to wireless. Another, pushed by AT&T, aims at preventing the FCC from trying to ensure smaller competitors get easier access to spectrum while preventing anti-competitive incumbent spectrum squatting. A third, notes Weinberg, takes aim at White Space broadband, in what's only the latest in a series of incumbent efforts to crush this technology before it gets off the ground and threatens their finances: One of the greatest boons of the transition from analog to digital TV broadcasting was supposed to be the creation of unlicensed whitespaces or super-wifi. This new spectrum which is much better at communicating long distances and through walls than current wifi spectrum would be used cooperatively by everyone and usher in a new era of wireless devices. However, a third amendment would destroy the FCCs power to allocate some of this great spectrum for unlicensed uses. That means that opportunity would simply pass us by. It's somewhat obvious that all three are the brain children of incumbent telcos eager to prohibit any effort to instill greater competition in the wireless market while further weakening the FCC's ability to actually regulate. On a related note, Rep. Thomas Marino is pushing a bill that hopes to "end the practice of including more than one subject in a single bill by requiring that each bill enacted by Congress be limited to only one subject." Ironically, "and for other purposes" is tacked on to the end of that bill's description.
|
 | | Why do we allow this? Why do we allow laws or more so proposed laws to be titled and mostly directed towards one area then tack on things about something completely different? | |
|  |  LinklistPremium join:2002-03-03 Longport, NJ kudos:5 | Re: Why do we allow this? said by Mr Anon :Why do we allow laws or more so proposed laws to be titled and mostly directed towards one area then tack on things about something completely different? Because that is part of the deal making in Congress and has been since Congress was formed back in late 1700's. | |
|  |  |  | | Re: Why do we allow this? BTW Marsha Blackheart is another Republican. The Republican party is the biggest threat to American way of life. The Teaparty hates the middle class America, Teaparty accomplished what Al-queda failed to accomplish; destroy our freedoms. The Teaparty is even credited with flying planes into federal buildings | |
|  |  |  |  jester121Premium join:2003-08-09 Lake Zurich, IL | Re: Why do we allow this? Also they are responsible for Peyton Manning's neck injury. -- I love the Green Bay Packers. /facepalm | |
|  |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  | | Stop watching so much MSNBC. Thomas Marino is a Republican and his proposed law makes sense. | |
|  |  |  |  LinklistPremium join:2002-03-03 Longport, NJ kudos:5 | said by nutcr0cker: The Teaparty hates the middle class America Actually the Tea Party loves the middle class. They hate the welfare abusers. | |
|
 |  |  | | Yes, but in the 1700's politician and lobbyist were not someones career. Being a Representative was a part time position. Both Democrats and Republicans can agree that Washington is broken and adjustments must be made to the way things work in Washington. | |
|
 |  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD | said by Mr Anon :Why do we allow laws or more so proposed laws to be titled and mostly directed towards one area then tack on things about something completely different? I agree completely. In some states this practice is illegal. Individual bills should be debated and voted on based solely on their own merits, not as riders to unrelated bills. -- "Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
|  |  |  rmdir join:2003-03-13 Chicago, IL | Re: Why do we allow this? Have they tacked SOPA/PIPA on the bill yet, or are they going to wait until the 11th hour to quietly add it? | |
|  |  |  |  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD | Re: Why do we allow this? said by rmdir:Have they tacked SOPA/PIPA on the bill yet, or are they going to wait until the 11th hour to quietly add it? Give it time. -- "Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
|
 |  |  | | I would agree 100%.
Bills should not be allowed: - To contain subject matter not related to the original bill. - To help one person or company or a small group of either.
In this day and age all bills should be electronically voted on by the members of congress with a comments field in which they can state the reason they voted for or against it. Then there is 100% accountability for the bills they choose.
Any claim of needing to add non-subject items to the bill to speed up workload or get the bill passed is a pure farce. Addressing one bill and any issues that arise and then putting it to vote on an individual basis would be much quicker than weaving through hundreds of pages of other crap along with it and if a bill can't pass on it's own merits then it shouldn't be passed, period.
I would also like there to be an official "spirit of the law" section that exactly spells out the intent of the law. This will close up about 99.9% of any loop holes any one finds because that spirit can be the measuring stick applied and we would not have to burden the courts with trying to determine the intent of the law in upholding the law. | |
|  |  |  |  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD | Re: Why do we allow this? I think that if this idea was in place, it would significantly reduce the ability of legislators to sell their votes to special interests. And yes, I blame legislators for this, special interests seeking to bribe legislators to make laws for them would not exist if legislators were not selling their influence. -- "Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
|  |  |  |  |  LinklistPremium join:2002-03-03 Longport, NJ kudos:5 | Re: Why do we allow this? said by pnh102:I think that if this idea was in place, it would significantly reduce the ability of legislators to sell their votes to special interests. And yes, I blame legislators for this, special interests seeking to bribe legislators to make laws for them would not exist if legislators were not selling their influence. A good article agreeing with you on who to blame: »articles.orlandosentinel.com/201···con-game
The actual column:
By Charlie Reese
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.
Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?
Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?
You and I don't propose a federal budget. The President does.
You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.
You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.
You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.
You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.
One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.
I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.
I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a President to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.
Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.
What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits.. The President can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.
The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House now? He is the leader of the majority party. He and fellow House members, not the President, can approve any budget they want. If the President vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.
It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.
If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.
If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red.
If the Army & Marines are in Iraq and Afghanistan it's because they want them in Iraq and Afghanistan ...
If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.
There are no insoluble government problems.
Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.
Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.
They, and they alone, have the power.
They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses. Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees...
We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess! -- The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, I'm from the government and I'm here to help. »www.politico.com/2012-election/
| |
|  |  |  |  |  |  | | Re: Why do we allow this? This article is stupid. We don't have inflation or high taxes. We have historically low taxes, and barely registering core inflation. Headline inflation fluctuates wildly, just as it did during the decade before the recession. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  LinklistPremium join:2002-03-03 Longport, NJ kudos:5 | Re: Why do we allow this? said by sonicmerlin:This article is stupid. We don't have inflation or high taxes. We have historically low taxes, and barely registering core inflation. Headline inflation fluctuates wildly, just as it did during the decade before the recession. If you looked at the link, the column was written years ago when inflation was high. But that doesn't change the thrust of the column at all, and that is Congress, President, SC are to blame. And P.S.> Taxes are high if you work for a living.
And this poem says it all about taxes(not just income tax adds to tax burden):
Tax his land, Tax his bed, Tax the table, At which he's fed.
Tax his tractor, Tax his mule, Teach him taxes Are the rule.
Tax his work, Tax his pay, He works for peanuts anyway!
Tax his cow, Tax his goat, Tax his pants, Tax his coat.
Tax his ties, Tax his shirt, Tax his work, Tax his dirt.
Tax his tobacco, Tax his drink, Tax him if he Tries to think.
Tax his cigars, Tax his beers, If he cries Tax his tears.
Tax his car, Tax his gas, Find other ways To tax his ass.
Tax all he has Then let him know That you won't be done Till he has no dough.
When he screams and hollers; Then tax him some more, Tax him till He's good and sore.
Then tax his coffin, Tax his grave, Tax the sod in Which he's laid...
Put these words Upon his tomb, 'Taxes drove me to my doom....'
When he's gone, Do not relax, Its time to apply The inheritance tax. -- The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, I'm from the government and I'm here to help. »www.politico.com/2012-election/
| |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | | Re: Why do we allow this? No they're not. Taxes are still lower than they've ever been. The upper middle class bears the brunt of taxation with the highest percentage in the country. Something like 40% of the people in this country don't even make enough money to be taxed. Your condescending attitude of "if you work", taxes are high, while typical of a baby-boomer, is incorrect. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD 1 edit | said by sonicmerlin:This article is stupid. We don't have inflation or high taxes. We have historically low taxes, and barely registering core inflation. Headline inflation fluctuates wildly, just as it did during the decade before the recession. LOL low taxes? What planet are you on?
You do know that you pay more taxes than the 1/3 or so that gets withheld from your paycheck, right? Most people pay sales tax, gas tax, property tax, utility tax, water tax, cell phone tax, and all manner of other taxes. I'd dare say the average working stiff in this country, between all levels of government, probably pays about half his income or more in taxes.
Does that sound like "low" taxes to you?
And "no inflation?" Do you shop for groceries? Do you pay for gasoline, electricity or any other form of energy? Do you pay rent on a typical one-bedroom apartment? What mythical place do you live in which there's no inflation? -- "Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | | Re: Why do we allow this? said by pnh102:said by sonicmerlin:This article is stupid. We don't have inflation or high taxes. We have historically low taxes, and barely registering core inflation. Headline inflation fluctuates wildly, just as it did during the decade before the recession. LOL low taxes? What planet are you on? You do know that you pay more taxes than the 1/3 or so that gets withheld from your paycheck, right? Most people pay sales tax, gas tax, property tax, utility tax, water tax, cell phone tax, and all manner of other taxes. I'd dare say the average working stiff in this country, between all levels of government, probably pays about half his income or more in taxes. Does that sound like "low" taxes to you? And "no inflation?" Do you shop for groceries? Do you pay for gasoline, electricity or any other form of energy? Do you pay rent on a typical one-bedroom apartment? What mythical place do you live in which there's no inflation? Sorry to disappoint you pnh, but headline inflation is not the same as core inflation. Headline inflation fluctuates wildly, and was actually *much* higher in the mid 2000s than it is now.
40% of the US populace is too poor to even quality for federal taxation. The tax levels on everyone else are still the lowest they've ever been. That includes corporations, which now only pay 3% of overall federal revenue, rather than the 30+% they paid in the 60s. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD | Re: Why do we allow this? said by sonicmerlin:Sorry to disappoint you pnh, but headline inflation is not the same as core inflation. Headline inflation fluctuates wildly, and was actually *much* higher in the mid 2000s than it is now. And how does this matter? You can classify inflation any way you like, but it doesn't mean you can't discount it. Yes, most of us know that the prices of electronics, toys, video games and other non-critical things that are offered in a free market context have not changed much. The problem is that those of us who work for a living cannot eat these things or use them power our cars to get to work and back. So for us, inflation in food and energy costs is a very real problem.
Case in point, when the price of gas nearly doubles in 3 years while your pay gets cut, or when it topped $4 a gallon back in 2008 and 2010, that hurts normal people. We have to take money away from the purchase of fun things to pay for gas instead.
said by sonicmerlin:40% of the US populace is too poor to even quality for federal taxation. The tax levels on everyone else are still the lowest they've ever been. That includes corporations, which now only pay 3% of overall federal revenue, rather than the 30+% they paid in the 60s. Those people who are lucky enough to be exempt from federal taxation aren't who I am talking about. I am talking about normal working people who must pay all manner of federal income tax, federal social security tax, federal medicare tax, state/local income tax, state/local property tax, state/local sales tax, state/local excise tax, etc. These taxes, regardless of how you want to spin the rates, are still a significant burden on most people. And in most states, any cuts in federal tax have been offset by hikes in state and local taxes. You might look at the numbers and think that taxes are low, but those of us who have to pay them will not agree with you.
And what do corporate taxes have to do with anything? The costs of those are just passed down to the customers of the companies who are subject to them. -- "Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  woody7Premium join:2000-10-13 Torrance, CA | Well spoken! -- BlooMe | |
|
 |  |  |  | | Yeah - in a perfect world, "one issue - one bill" would be great. Accountability would, however, cause the congresscritters to lose what they love best (next to $$$) - Plausible Deniability. Most of 'em could even give an eel lessons on being slippery. | |
|
 |  |  | | It things like this and lobbyists that seem to need to go.
We know they are PAID to push the companies agenda, We know that said company may contribute to them for favorable actions.
Why allow it? | |
|  |  |  |  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD | Re: Why do we allow this? said by Mr Anon :It things like this and lobbyists that seem to need to go.
We know they are PAID to push the companies agenda, We know that said company may contribute to them for favorable actions.
Why allow it? The only reason lobbyists get paid to do what they do is because elected officials have no problems making that kind of work worthwhile. If every politician ignored the bribe checks provided by lobbyists and other special interests, the entire lobbying racket would collapse the next day. -- "Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
|
 |  |  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium join:2000-01-17 Tulsa, OK | said by pnh102:I agree completely. In some states this practice is illegal. Individual bills should be debated and voted on based solely on their own merits, not as riders to unrelated bills. Can I get an Amen. This right here would help.
If a Politician had to stand up and vote yes or no on these types of items you could really see their true motives and positions. They'd have to actually campaign and fight for their positions and risk paying the price, which is how it should be... By lumping it all into huge political hot potato bills they get passed with ease and the Yay voters can always argue they had to support the bill despite "serious misgivings" due to the "positive overall" effect of the rest of the law. -- "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
 |  | | Because of their Rich Backers ! Simply put.......... | |
|
 | | Is It Any Wonder Congress' Approval Rating Is So Low? The U.S. Congress' approval rating is at an all-time low. According to one recent article, things such as polygamy, pornography, the U.S. going communist, banks (!) and even the B.P. oil spill had lower disapproval than the U.S. Congress.
No need to wonder why. | |
|  |  | | Re: Is It Any Wonder Congress' Approval Rating Is So Low? I think it was those things have higher approval ratings than congress (not disapproval), but regardless, congress sucks. | |
|  |  |  | | Re: Is It Any Wonder Congress' Approval Rating Is So Low? said by Rambo76098:I think it was those things have higher approval ratings than congress (not disapproval), but regardless, congress sucks. Note I wrote that those other things have "lower disapproval" ratings. I wrote it that way because I quite honestly find it hard to believe anybody actually "approved of" the Gulf oil spill But, yes, that's the way the various articles in the n00ze read: That those things have higher approval ratings than the U.S. Congress.
Pretty sad, no matter how you word it.
And Congress, just like the dominant media, just keeps doing the same ugly kinds of things, all the while seemingly mystified as to why they're so widely held in contempt. | |
|
 ArrayListnetbus developerPremium join:2005-03-19 Evanston, IL | congress is full of scumbags need I say more? | |
|  |  plkLil' Duffer Burger BarnPremium join:2002-04-20 Ogden, IA | Re: congress is full of scumbags yup just about every day someone on the Hill is selling us out. | |
|
 Reviews:
·Millenicom
·AT&T Southeast
·Verizon Wireless..
| White Spaces I support the goal of licensed fixed location white space regulations. In order to operate in the OTA television bands today you need a license and staff who understand and can adhere to non interference regulations and goals. So if you want to operate a broadband service in the white spaces you should have the same level of expertise. You can install fixed location towers and fixed location CPE to provide the service. If there is an interference complaint it can be tracked to a specific device at a specific location. The FCC or party interfered with can call the owner of the device and inform them of the situation and the location. That way we have much less chance of some moving mobile device powering up and interfering with an OTA TV signal with no way to track it to the owner. | |
|  | | politicians are morons i agree.. our Govt puts together some really stupid sh!#... what does wireless have to do with payroll.. and our politicians wonder why the laws in this country are so f'd up.. wireless needs to stay with wireless not payroll or maybe in the future abortion or a stub-your-toe law.. pathetic morons.. they have their own agenda and can care less about the people or the future of this country... | |
|  Steve BPremium join:2004-08-02 Seattle, WA | And they wonder why.... Yet the politicians wonder why people don't vote or quit voting all together. What's the point? They all say what you want to hear so they can get elected and then its screw you and they go and take care of their own agenda while in office. Our government is broken, corrupt and just plain crap. | |
|  | | Marsha Blackburn = Moron ...and I challenge anyone to prove otherwise. She is pretty though. | |
|  |  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium join:2000-01-17 Tulsa, OK | Re: Marsha Blackburn = Moron said by CableConvert:...and I challenge anyone to prove otherwise. She is pretty though. AH, then fully qualified to be President, then? -- "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
 KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium join:2000-01-17 Tulsa, OK | I am getting so tired of Washington DC Our politicians are so sold out.
This is nothing more then incumbent wish lists to hamper competition and keep consumers subservient being lumped into a political hot potato bill that Politicians won't dare to oppose and the President can't politically veto.
Same crap, different day. What should happen is the PARTICULAR politicians who add these measures to these bills should be called out on the carpet and then summarily roasted and ejected from office. -- "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
 | |
|
|