dslreports logo
 story category
Obama Likes Neutrality, But What About Metered Billing?
President tackles a few questions on broadband...

By now most people are familiar with Time Warner Cable's failed efforts to implement low caps and high overages, and AT&T's continuing trials of a similar idea in two markets. It's only a matter of time before such models, which are loved by investors because they involve consumers paying more money for the same (or in some instances less) product, see another industry-wide push. We know that Republican FCC Commissioners are loyally beating the metered billing drum for carriers, but what about the President? Based on a Q&A session this week on YouTube, he's not a fan:

quote:
"We’re getting pushback, obviously, from some of the bigger carriers who would like to be able to charge more fees and extract more money from wealthier customers. But we think that runs counter to the whole spirit of openness that has made the Internet such a powerful engine for not only economic growth, but also for the generation of ideas and creativity."
So is that a hard line "no" to metered billing then? Or a Presidential, telecom immunity kind of no? Or is he simply talking about the fear that major carriers would charge companies that already pay for bandwidth extra money for prioritization (which you'll recall is what got this whole neutrality ball rolling in 2005 in the first place). Whether policy makers are aware of it or not, the push toward metered billing is a big part of network neutrality, given restrictive per gigabyte pricing models can be used to direct consumers to select content (for instance a carrier's own uncapped TV services instead of cheaper Internet video alternatives).

The FCC's Democratic Commissioners remain murky on whether they support such billing models, and where they stand on the issue will be important to discern ahead of the telecom industry's next attempt to wean consumers off of the flat-rate pricing model they've grown used to. Again, many people confuse what carriers want to do (low caps and high per gigabyte overages) with what they might like to see (a pure per-byte billing model where you only pay for what you use), and the former frequently fails to offer real consumer value.
view:
topics flat nest 

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

Matt3

Premium Member

Opinion

I think it's pretty well known that Obama believes more in openness and consumer protections than the previous administration. The real question, is will he have the cajones to take on big telecom, will he let the FCC (Migdon Clyburn) tackle it, or will the big telecom lobbying machine bribe enough members of Congress to stymie any attempts to kill metered billing?

DaveDude
No Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey

DaveDude

Member

Re: Opinion

Actions speak louder , then words. There was no openness regarding the healthcare bill. Why would this be different ? Plus i dont think this the role the of the president.

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

Matt3

Premium Member

Re: Opinion

said by DaveDude:

Actions speak louder , then words. There was no openness regarding the healthcare bill. Why would this be different ? Plus i dont think this the role the of the president.
There was plenty of openness until it went into a thousand committees.
matrix3D
join:2006-09-27
Middletown, CT

1 edit

matrix3D

Member

Re: Opinion

Consumer protections? Maybe, it's yet to be seen. Openness? That's laughable. Having a closed door meeting where only Obama, Reid and Pelosi are hammering out the details is in no way "open." And this is just a single example of how he has reneged on this campaign promise... there are plenty others.

EDIT: I should also add that just because Obama's mug is plastered on the evening news every night so they can inform us as to what kind of ice cream his daughters had when he took them out or what vegetables his wife Michelle is growing in the White House garden does not qualify as being "open."
WhatNow
Premium Member
join:2009-05-06
Charlotte, NC

WhatNow

Premium Member

Re: Opinion

They learned all about open government from President Chaney.

HotRodFoto
Premium Member
join:2003-04-19
Denver, CO

HotRodFoto to DaveDude

Premium Member

to DaveDude
You're right. Bush redid all the bankruptcy laws to favor corporations and businesses, Obama on the other hand passed a bill that allows renters to stay in their homes for 90 days after being foreclosed on. Actions DO speak louder than words.

DaveDude
No Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey

DaveDude

Member

Re: Opinion

said by HotRodFoto:

You're right. Bush redid all the bankruptcy laws to favor corporations and businesses, Obama on the other hand passed a bill that allows renters to stay in their homes for 90 days after being foreclosed on. Actions DO speak louder than words.
So loans shouldnt be repaid to lenders ?

HotRodFoto
Premium Member
join:2003-04-19
Denver, CO

HotRodFoto

Premium Member

Re: Opinion

said by DaveDude:

said by HotRodFoto:

You're right. Bush redid all the bankruptcy laws to favor corporations and businesses, Obama on the other hand passed a bill that allows renters to stay in their homes for 90 days after being foreclosed on. Actions DO speak louder than words.
So loans shouldnt be repaid to lenders ?
Is predatory lending actually lending?

DaveDude
No Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey

DaveDude

Member

Re: Opinion

said by HotRodFoto:
said by DaveDude:
said by HotRodFoto:

You're right. Bush redid all the bankruptcy laws to favor corporations and businesses, Obama on the other hand passed a bill that allows renters to stay in their homes for 90 days after being foreclosed on. Actions DO speak louder than words.
So loans shouldnt be repaid to lenders ?
Is predatory lending actually lending?
Is forcing banks to give bad loans, good policy ?

HotRodFoto
Premium Member
join:2003-04-19
Denver, CO

HotRodFoto

Premium Member

Re: Opinion

said by DaveDude:

Is forcing banks to give bad loans, good policy ?
No one is forcing anyone to give fraudulent and deceptive loans to anybody. Look at the current problems and fees now associated with Credit Cards. It isn't fair to financially rape the American consumer. Anyone knows the last administration was anything BUT consumer friendly, and heavily favored big business. Is it fair that these banks scream "we are going under" yet pay out millions to their executives with bonuses while Joe down the street is losing his house, where it will sit for who knows how long, unoccupied, devaluing the houses and the property around it? It's all about the mighty dollar, sadly, and screwing the people.

jester121
Premium Member
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL

jester121 to HotRodFoto

Premium Member

to HotRodFoto
Funny, I don't seem to recall the executive branch being able to "pass bills." Perhaps a civics lessons is in order?

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

pnh102

Premium Member

Re: Opinion

said by jester121:

Funny, I don't seem to recall the executive branch being able to "pass bills." Perhaps a civics lessons is in order?
Everyone knows that when Bush was "president" it was just Dick Cheney ruling by decree! And if you didn't like it, he'd shoot you.

n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY

1 edit

n2jtx to Matt3

Member

to Matt3
said by Matt3:

I think it's pretty well known that Obama believes more in openness and consumer protections than the previous administration. The real question, is will he have the cajones to take on big telecom, will he let the FCC (Migdon Clyburn) tackle it, or will the big telecom lobbying machine bribe enough members of Congress to stymie any attempts to kill metered billing?
They are going to have to be opposed to metered billing lest they suddenly have a desire for a major increase in taxes. Since broadband has basically been declared a right, allowing the industry to go to metered billing means the government, hence us who pay into the USF, will have to pony more money for all those people who are too poor to afford service. Not saying I agree with the "broadband is a right" idea but metered billing will only increase the costs for the people who pay their own bills beyond their own costs. We will be paying substantially more into the USF in order to keep the carriers fat and happy. Flat rate is the only thing which will keep things in check for now.

Uncle Paul
join:2003-02-04
USA

Uncle Paul to Matt3

Member

to Matt3
If only he and Biden would get out of the MPAA's bed we'd be set.

r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium Member
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX

r81984 to Matt3

Premium Member

to Matt3
Obama has no control over congress.
All he can do is teach them how our government is supposed to work, who the government is supposed to protect, what the constitution says, and how compromise works.

If congress can't learn these things then Obama will not be able to do anything.
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

patcat88

Member

Re: Opinion

said by r81984:

Obama has no control over congress.
All he can do is teach them how our government is supposed to work, who the government is supposed to protect, what the constitution says, and how compromise works.

If congress can't learn these things then Obama will not be able to do anything.
Time for Obama to learn how to Veto, and how to order around the executive depts to make congressmen's life hell in their districts. Or turn the FBI on congressmen for embezzlement and election laws violations.

r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium Member
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX

r81984

Premium Member

Re: Opinion

If Obama wants to uphold his standards then he will have to veto everything. He has to compromise like everyone else.
It is hard enough to compromise with 51 people, now we have to do it with 60 people in the senate.

These people are so stubborn that you have to agree to give their state billions of non existent money to get their vote. Then you have more people who demonize everything so you have to give their state even more free money for them to vote for something that they told all their people was the devil.
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

patcat88

Member

Re: Opinion

said by r81984:

These people are so stubborn that you have to agree to give their state billions of non existent money to get their vote. Then you have more people who demonize everything so you have to give their state even more free money for them to vote for something that they told all their people was the devil.
Then time to Edgar Hoover them. They will speak with a woman who isn't their wife, or take a gift from lobbyests eventually, or hell, just make stuff up and leak it to MSM.

nedaname2p
@suddenlink.net

nedaname2p to r81984

Anon

to r81984
he can veto. but he doesn't, make up your own reasons why.

r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium Member
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX

r81984

Premium Member

Re: Opinion

said by nedaname2p :

he can veto. but he doesn't, make up your own reasons why.
Why so anonymous? Is this George Bush posting on dslreports???

Obama can't just pass whatever he wants. Bills start in congress. If the bill is 60% good and 40% garbage he have no choice to allow the 40% garbage or the good will never be passed. Nothing may ever get passed if there is no compromise.

Uncle Paul
join:2003-02-04
USA

Uncle Paul

Member

Re: Opinion

said by r81984:

said by nedaname2p :

he can veto. but he doesn't, make up your own reasons why.
Why so anonymous? Is this George Bush posting on dslreports???

Obama can't just pass whatever he wants. Bills start in congress. If the bill is 60% good and 40% garbage he have no choice to allow the 40% garbage or the good will never be passed. Nothing may ever get passed if there is no compromise.
Ohhh I see. Corporations can write legislation and have it introduced by donations, but the President can't get something put before Congress by finding sponsoring members. Nice

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

FFH5

Premium Member

Gov't should not get in to business of setting prices

Unless we want to get in to a totally planned economy, with 5 year plans and price control authorities, the gov't would do well to avoid telling private businesses on what they can charge. This has been tried in the past here and in other countries and it always turns out to be an economic disaster.
jus10
join:2009-08-04
Gainesville, VA

1 recommendation

jus10

Member

Re: Gov't should not get in to business of setting prices

Yes, because naturally the only options are lazier-faire capitalism and Soviet planned economies. Surely we couldn't have some limited regulations to keep corporations from taking advantage of people. Nah.

Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02

4 edits

1 recommendation

Karl Bode

News Guy

Re: Gov't should not get in to business of setting prices

Well said. I always love the false choice of unfettered capitalism or food lines. As if some kind of regulatory balance isn't possible. "All or none" is a bunk choice put forward by people who want to pretend that protecting their own wallet is some kind of sophisticated political ethos.

JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA

JakCrow

Member

Re: Gov't should not get in to business of setting prices

said by Karl Bode:

Well said. I always love the false choice of unfettered capitalism or food lines. As if some kind of regulatory balance isn't possible. "All or none" is a bunk choice put forward by people who want to pretend that protecting their own wallet is some kind of sophisticated political ethos.
Remember. The U.S. isn't lagging behind the rest of the world when it comes to broadband because Americans want to "use" bandwidth. They don't actually "need" bandwidth.
margaf
join:2000-12-22
Las Vegas, NV

margaf to jus10

Member

to jus10
said by jus10:

Yes, because naturally the only options are lazier-faire capitalism and Soviet planned economies. Surely we couldn't have some limited regulations to keep corporations from taking advantage of people. Nah.
Thinking is hard for those that see things that way, Glenn Beck told them that the world is ending and they need to buy lots of gold so theyre scared.

HotRodFoto
Premium Member
join:2003-04-19
Denver, CO

1 recommendation

HotRodFoto to FFH5

Premium Member

to FFH5
Yes because price fixing is a GOOD thing! /sarcasm

Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02

1 edit

Karl Bode

News Guy

Re: Gov't should not get in to business of setting prices

Well you know, if you prevent price fixing, predatory pricing, or anti-competitive behavior, the Communists win.

HotRodFoto
Premium Member
join:2003-04-19
Denver, CO

HotRodFoto

Premium Member

Re: Gov't should not get in to business of setting prices

said by Karl Bode:

Well you know, if you prevent price fixing, predatory pricing, or anti-competitive behavior, the Communists win.
Well said comrade! lol

Z80A
Premium Member
join:2009-11-23

Z80A

Premium Member

Obama no messiah

Obama, like all politicians, likes whatever will fill his campaign war chest the fastest.

ALL politicians are for sale to the highest bidder.
jb50
join:2010-02-03
Houston, TX

jb50

Member

Re: Obama no messiah

Yes, corporations are greedy but, that is what they do, make money. The ones who are really to blame are the gov regulators. They are bought and paid for by these same corporations doing their bidding for them. Until campaign contribution reform is implemented, which is probably never, there will be no justice for the people. Until then, all we have is our ability to vote these @$$ holes out of office, so exercise that right!

Z80A
Premium Member
join:2009-11-23

Z80A

Premium Member

Re: Obama no messiah

The problem is this bribery is called free speech when it is clear that it is bribery. Bribery is not 'protected speech'.

Any person or company that donates money to a politician and then that politician does something that directly benefits that corporation or person should go to prison along with the politician. Any special interest that crafts a bill for a legislator should be fined no less than $10B and any officers who approved it go to prison.

Treat these activities as what they are...bribery.
jb50
join:2010-02-03
Houston, TX

jb50

Member

Re: Obama no messiah

Yes, I agree. Unfortunately we have a delima here in that no politician will ever vote for a law that will hurt themselves. Therefore, this will never become a reality.

Mule_Y
@verizon.net

Mule_Y

Anon

Metered billing......

Metered billing will bring E-commerce (NetFlix and long google searches for bargain shoppers) to a grinding halt not to mention on-line game play will also suffer big....

As cell phone plan went from low caps and high overages to an all you can use plan......you mean home inertnet is going in the opposite direction, ain't right.

••••

footballdude
Premium Member
join:2002-08-13
Imperial, MO

footballdude

Premium Member

Can you say busted?

We’re getting pushback, obviously, from some of the bigger carriers who would like to be able to charge more fees and extract more money from wealthier customers. But we think that runs counter to the whole spirit of openness that has made the Internet such a powerful engine for not only economic growth, but also for the generation of ideas and creativity

It's OK for Obama to tax more money from 'the rich' and he won't admit that it has a bad effect on the economy but someone else doing it is bad.

••••
moes
Premium Member
join:2009-11-15
Cedar City, UT

moes

Premium Member

.

Basically if they meter me I am walking. I got no need to give them more money just so they can buy a new car that they do not need. Just like RIAA MPAA. HAHAHA Not giving them any money. keeping all my music restricted to Indy artist that are not connected with gold diggers.

Belinrahs
I have an ego the size of a small planet
Premium Member
join:2007-09-07
Nashville, MI

Belinrahs

Premium Member

The obvious truth

It doesn't take half a brain to see the absurdity in the pure per-byte pricing model. First of all, companies like Verizon who are fee-happy (remember that $1.99 mystery data fee? Yeah, so do I) will set a status quo of per data-unit pricing that is outrageous compared to what it actually costs them to transport that amount of data.

I also feel that this kind of pricing is a huge hinderance to development and technology nationwide. Not to mention that as we get faster broadband speeds, we'll be using up data exponentially faster than before, leading to the fat cats getting even fatter.

Is that REALLY what you want to happen?

•••••

HotRodFoto
Premium Member
join:2003-04-19
Denver, CO

HotRodFoto

Premium Member

let's face it

Metered billing sucks. It is a money grab from corporations and screws the consumer. This isn't 1996 with AOL people. We have evolved, the internet has evolved. 10 years from now, things will be very different online than they are now. I want to watch youtube, Netflix, play games, share my photos when I can, not worrying about the amount of information and data which I am consuming. Things like this not only are anti-consumer but also stall advances. Look at how we currently rank in the world scale on Broadband. It's pathetic. I for one am sick of corporations screwing the consumers.
Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA

Sammer

Member

Re: let's face it

said by HotRodFoto:

Metered billing sucks. It is a money grab from corporations and screws the consumer.
It's definitely a money grab when what is really being talked about is a high fixed monthly fee, low caps, and exorbitant overage fees. There are absolutely no providers interested in charging Grandma $5/month plus their true cost per Megabyte.
33358088 (banned)
join:2008-09-23

33358088 (banned)

Member

UUB affects everyone mister president

you allow it and guess what happens they will go at everyone like BCE

that UUB coming to us means on top of the govt's 13% HST where it was 7%
ill have to add 22.50 PLUS maybe more and pay 13% on top of that charge as well

granmas and granpas and disabled everywhere should be tossing there cookies anytime as they get basically told YOUR TOO POOR
basically discriminated against

NOCTech75
Premium Member
join:2009-06-29
Marietta, GA

NOCTech75

Premium Member

Broadband usage = wealth?

"We’re getting pushback, obviously, from some of the bigger carriers who would like to be able to charge more fees and extract more money from wealthier customers."

Really? I think that assertion is craptastic.

Bill Neilson
Premium Member
join:2009-07-08
Alexandria, VA

Bill Neilson

Premium Member

In the end, I see no reason that Corporations

won't win out

With rare exceptions, they almost always do

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

pnh102

Premium Member

Fail

Looks like 0bama is searching for the next thing he can screw up.
33358088 (banned)
join:2008-09-23

33358088 (banned)

Member

change in his pocket

told ya so

Un
@verizon.net

Un

Anon

It's all okay

Don't worry, let the big carriers charge all they want on us. Eventually we'll have no money left to spend, paying for their services and we'll stop connecting to the internet in general. They can then go out of business and we can go back to good old fashion book and whatever there was before the internet. Ball in a cup anyone?

ctceo
Premium Member
join:2001-04-26
South Bend, IN

1 edit

ctceo

Premium Member

Been working on this one

Apparently a lot of people want metered billing cause there really aren't enough people speaking up. There inaction tells the corporations one thing, "It's ok with us".

See Sig below:
Would you like your ISP to govern how much you can use the web in a month? Well it might happen if we don't do something NOW! »www.ipetitions.com/petition/PMDBI/ -- DONATING IS VOLUNTARY!