Fight for the Future Rallying Against Unreleased 'Title X' Bill
Fight for the Future had amassed by our deadline Monday nearly 42,000 signatures from people opposing potential “Title X” net neutrality legislation. The group, formed in 2011 as a digital advocacy nonprofit, attacked the bill, which has not been in…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
any way officially released or announced. Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John Thune, R-S.D., is helping put together the bill, which he has framed as an alternative to Communications Act Title II reclassification (see 1501070049). Thune worked with committee ranking member Bill Nelson, D-Fla., on this bill but indicated that he and Democrats differ on when to advance it -- Thune wants to move before the FCC votes on net neutrality Feb. 26. Nelson first hinted at such legislation to us in mid-November (see 1411130049). “Congress leaders are planning on starting 2015 with a bill called ‘Title X’ that would compromise the World Wide Web by taking away the FCC’s ability to protect the open Internet and giving cable companies the power to charge for less access,” the Fight for the Future petition said. “This bill would be a huge betrayal to the millions of Internet users that demanded that Congress support real net neutrality.” The petition warned against Congress' acting before the FCC, saying that “if Congress introduces ‘Title X’ first, it could hijack the entire process and reverse any progress for net neutrality.” It has a goal of 50,000 signatures. Free Press also criticized the Title X idea, in a blog post Monday. "Congressional attempts to undermine these long-established principles with bad legislation -- or to strip away the FCC’s ability to enforce them -- wouldn’t just gut Net Neutrality," Government Relations Manager Sandra Fulton said. "They would endanger our basic rights to communicate and express ourselves freely -- values that are a cornerstone to our democracy and a free society." No new laws are required on this front, she said.