6 ms·
Call for the Resignation of FCC Chairman Ajit Varadaraj Pai
- passwordqq 9y agoMaybe he can do a hillary who would cry an attack on women any time she was attacked and claim that this is anti-minority.
- leetrout 9y agoSigned... thanks for the link. I don’t think this administration has much interest in what “we the people” really want, though. Hopefully people call their reps to voice concerns about the repeal of NN too.
- dmitrygr 9y agos/this/any/g
- ivraatiems 9y agoThe previous administration created the We The People site this petition is on... and the CFPB... and the FCC rules that Pai now wants to overturn. So, no, it is this administration.
- folknor 9y agoIf you think the previous administration was "better", you probably haven't read Thomas Frank's book, "Listen, Liberal!". Thomas Frank is a lifelong Democrat and an actual liberal. It illustrates how US politics were hijacked, and the horrible policies of the administrations since Bill Clintons inauguration. If you are someone who thinks Obama or Clinton were "good" presidents, the book will dispell you of that notion. I'm not saying the things you enumerated are bad things. Personally, I am fiercly pro-NN, and I think Pai should actually be imprisoned (though there's probably no current law that would allow it, obviously IANAL), and the CFPB is something the US has lacked for ages (though I'm not sure if it has enough powers to enforce anything much). But I am saying that the previous administration was actually not better, all things considered. And if you think so, the book will convince you otherwise.
- victor106 9y agoThey might not be "good" in all the things that they did. Running a federal govt like the US is no joke and I am sure that everything that they did they could have done better. But you cannot compare to the level of dishonesty and incompetency that this administration has. Lets not make the perfect the enemy of the good.
- folknor 9y agoYes, I can, but that's only because I have read that book. Which cites its sources for everything. If you can't compare it, that's because you're missing the data to do so. I'm quite certain you'd like reading it. I don't really want to push that book this much, but I do want liberals to understand the dishonesty and malice inherent in the actings of previous administrations that are held in high esteem for no apparent reason - like Clinton and Obama. And the reason I want that is because it would be helpful to liberals. The US is so far behind on many basic things, it's a joke to the rest of the world; - The level of poverty in the US is staggering - you can reasonably say that more than 50% of citizens live below the poverty line. - The lack of basic bank security, the fact that if someone steals your bank account money, you don't automatically get it back from the bank. - The cost of health care is actually insane - The number of citizens in jail, and the exploitation of them for manufacturing (talk about slavery) - The low number of people who vote. In my country, more people vote in _city_ level elections than do in your presidential elections. Always. By a factor of 20%. "representative democracy" my ass. Anyone who lives in Europe knows these things. And any honest US citizen who has lived abroad knows it. I am saying these things to illustrate that I want to _help_ you. And that includes reading that book, and dispelling your notion that Clinton or Obama were good or honest. Competent, oh yes - competent enough to literally destroy your nation.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- craftyguy 9y ago>Running a federal govt like the US is no joke Ha. Donald & friends' behavior disgrees with that statement.
- awinder 9y agoIf you haven’t been able to see the tangible ways that one party is way more beholden to monied interests by this point, I don’t know what it will take. Some people just want to watch the word burn.
- bitsnbytes 9y agoIf you are a political cheerleader for the DNC or the GOP you are lighting the fires. Money overcomes political ideals or the interest of those with less money. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10769041/The-US-is-an-oligarchy-study-concludes.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/1... "Report by researchers from Princeton and Northwestern universities suggests that US political system serves special interest organisations, instead of voters "
- indubitable 9y agoWhat you may not see is both parties playing people against one another. They're both completely beholden to special interests. As perhaps the most visible example, did you ever wonder why the TPP, which was going to be arguably the single biggest corporate handout in US legislative history, was being spearheaded by Obama? Or why he was going about it in such an absurdly undemocratic fashion? Keeping the people divided is the key to keeping the establishment powers entrenched in office. So long as the people hate the alternative sufficiently, they need not worry about the quality of their own candidate. Clinton won the popular vote, yet I think it's safe to say that most voted for her not because she truly was the type of candidate that people wanted in office -- but because the alternative was considered absolutely unacceptable under any circumstance. And the same is no doubt true of much of Trump's support. I don't think another Ross Perot 1992 is ever likely to happen. If that's before your political period, an independent individual (vastly more eloquent and reasonable, but politically similar to Trump) ended up making a huge run. At one point he was actually ahead in the polls against candidates from both parties. In the general he ran against Bush and Clinton, even then some of the most powerful names in politics. He pulled 19% of the vote - destroying Bush's incumbency and effectively giving the presidency to Clinton. But far from just a spoiler, that's a single outsider independently threatening to 'take over' Washington. The increasingly sensationalized and divisive rhetoric with a focus on identity politics, really began to spike in the elections to come. So long as both side of the political spectrum think those on the other side are completely intolerable, it makes it much easier to control people. You can even get them to do things like vote for people they don't actually want in office -- they just need to be convinced that it's better than the alternative.
- dragonwriter 9y agoThe current Congressional majority has made clear (including several members making explicit statements) that their legislative actions are motivated by the concerns of major donors, so don't expect any more concern for public opinion from them than the administration.
- sddfd 9y agoThe fact that major donors are more important than democracy is not widely acknowledged. It is important to expose this mechanism, document it, and starte a broad discussion about it.
- chiefalchemist 9y agoWe've allowed them to become the controlling force because we don't take any significant and tangible action. They don't need to listen because we're complicit and complacent.
- afarrell 9y agoWe're all aware that this is an action being taken by the executive branch, not the legislative. However, Executive departments rely on the legislative branch to get relevant legislation passed, to confirm appointees, and for other forms of support for their actions. Administrative departments generally try to avoid angering the relevant standing committees that regulate them. The website for the US Senate subcomittee on Communications, Technology, Innovation, and the Internet is here https://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/communicationstechnologyandtheinternet https://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/communicati... There appear to be two relevant subcommittees of the US House of Representatives: https://energycommerce.house.gov/subcommittee/communications-and-technology/ https://energycommerce.house.gov/subcommittee/communications... and https://energycommerce.house.gov/subcommittee/digital-commerce-and-consumer-protection/ https://energycommerce.house.gov/subcommittee/digital-commer... From the looks of the twitter iframes* on both house subcomittee pages, the FCC has significant legislative support for these rules changes.
- awinder 9y agoThat’s really not true, there was a bipartisan push to pull this power away from the FCC specifically because members of both parties saw net neutrality becoming a political football. And that the regulatory uncertainty of back-and-forth, regulation and deregulation, on a 4 year basis, was going to ultimately be more damaging than going one way or the other. http://thehill.com/policy/technology/341605-senate-republican-we-need-bipartisan-net-neutrality-legislation http://thehill.com/policy/technology/341605-senate-republica... Which died primarily due to inaction caused by the republican members of Congress chasing long shot bills and wasting productive time for unproductive time.
- libertyEQ 9y agoThis is a great point. Congress is abdicating its responsibility to enact proper legislation and allowing this issue to be decided by the whims of whatever the executive branch wants (which is subject to change every 4 years). We need certainty with regards to this issue, and this is not the only example of congress abdicating its responsibilities (war, healthcare, immigration, etc.).
- tanto 9y agoWho seriously believes it would make a difference? As the Chairman is just a puppet and will if resigned be replaced by another. The USA is not a functioning democracy anymore and you should aim at replacing your complete government and the rules how it's elected.
- pcunite 9y agoThe USA is not a functioning democracy Thank goodness too! We are a Constitutional Republic. A pure democracy only works when the majority is moral.
- gech 9y agoThis constitutional republic isn't working either.
- bitsnbytes 9y agoBut the oligarchy is working beautifully. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10769041/The-US-is-an-oligarchy-study-concludes.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/1... To bad people have become political cheerleaders that care more about their party and ego then the country or holding their own party accountable. Republican and Democrat political cheerleaders is a big reason we have lost our gov't along with people being to stupid to focus on the REAL issue versus distractions such as healthcare,welfare ,taxes,racism,sexism,sexuality,religion,heck even net neutrality. The only issue we should be talking about is 1. term limits in congress. 2. Closing revolving doors. 3. Reforming lobbying 4. Reforming fund raising. 5. Real transparency. you cant expect a bunch of people with conflict of interest to do the right thing for anyone but themselves.
- VeronicaJJ123 9y agoyou are welcome to leave.
- dang 9y ago
- kevin2r 9y agoSeriously, is this all the plan of one guy? Ajit Pai, if so, how could we give such power to one person. I don't think it's his plan it never it's, his resignation won't mean anything.
- dragonwriter 9y agoNo, ending the FCC’s policy of net neutrality has been the general Republican Party position for years.
- bitsnbytes 9y agoI would say more correctly the Republican Party was the one chosen by the lobbyist to take the heat for this anti consumer action. In reality when the democrats get back control Net Neutrality will unlikely be brought back. Just like the Republicans did with Obmacare. They labeled it the anti-christ of all regulations then they get full control and they do nothing. The DNC and the GOP are just tools of the lobbyist to keep the people distracted , separated, and appeased to think they still have a voice.
- RubenSandwich 9y agoThe unfortunate truth, IMO, is that the two party system in America has broken down in that they both serve corporate interests and then blame each other in order to keep the news cycle going and the populist distracted. What can we do? I believe we need to move away from a First-past-the-post voting system, as it mathematically converges to a two party system. There is a small push to get America to move to Ranked Choice Voting: http://www.fairvote.org http://www.fairvote.org.
- tzs 9y agoIf "the lobbyist" had the power over both parties that you are imagining, then net neutrality would have not passed in the first place. Or do you think that was part of some long game to hide the influence of "the lobbyist" by appearing to lose on that issue, even though that meant "the lobbyist" had to put up with net neutrality for many years (it would have been at least 14 years if Clinton had one)? Do you explain the numerous other things besides net neutrality for which Democrats and Republicans have consistently been on opposite sides for a very long time as just fake outs by "the lobbyist"?
- Alakagom 9y agoPeople are missing the point in this case. Ajit is not the problem at all, he is a pawn in a larger game. Only hope is fixing the system.
- raverbashing 9y agoWhile it's ok to not shoot the messenger, this is not the case here. "We were just following orders" didn't stick before and shouldn't stick in this case. Whoever pull the trigger is guilty as well. I'm actually against asking for his resignation, the appropriate action would be his demotion from position.
- VeronicaJJ123 9y agoAs a member of tech community I support Ajit Pai and I think what he is doing is good for the open-ness of the internet.
- dmritard96 9y agoIts probably worth noting that this site may be manipulated: http://variety.com/2017/digital/news/white-house-petition-site-broken-1201977541/ http://variety.com/2017/digital/news/white-house-petition-si... After the election, many petitions were not registering signatures. My position is that this was deliberate. So if this somehow 'fails' or gets stuck at some number, don't be surprised...
- bitsnbytes 9y agoRight now its at 47,008 signed LOL, somebody actually down voted stating that 47,008 have signed so far?
- imustbeevil 9y agoI mean two of the top 3 petitions are calling for Trump to release his tax returns (1.1 million) and put his assets in a blind trust (356,031). Whether or not the site is being manipulated I can guarantee no one from the White House is clamoring to respond.
- sddfd 9y agoIs it just me or is the number of signed petitions not increasing?
- convery 9y agoGuessing they do some basic verification and purge bad signatures over time. If it's anything like Reddit where subreddits with <80 subscribers get 30,000 upvotes on posts about net neutrality; one can assume that there will be a lot of bots on that site too.
- monday_ 9y agoWhere the hell are Google and Facebook on this? The idea that they'll profit from the repeal is simply naive - without net neutrality Comcast et al will be able to extort whatever they want from SV. I realize that this is unethical, but Alphabet alone can match ISP donations and then some. Alphabet plus Facebook can probably buy post Citizens United Congress fifty times over.
- sebleon 9y agoThey’re definitely already on this. Likely they have a deal in place with Comcast already.
- rz2k 9y agoI am surprised that they fought for net neutrality at all in the past. The primary threats to their businesses are new companies, and barriers to entry are their best protections. Having money skimmed by companies like Comcast is far better than being replaced by a better search engine or a new social network. Right now it is much easier to implement an idea and scale it than it would be if you began also having to finance new extortion fees before you even had a chance to validate your idea.
- niij 9y agoI see it the opposite way. Big companies are too big to be blocked in any "standard" plan. So the effect of this legislation is that little guys will be blocked.
- febin 9y agoWhy is HN pushing this post down? Considering the votes and comments the post has got ,it should be in the top of the list?
- zeep 9y agoHe should resign... for trying to rape the American people... Clinton resigned for less than that.
- chiefalchemist 9y agoI'm not so sure disagreeing is grounds for demanding resignation. And a couple clicks for a digital signature hardly says, "I'm pissed odf." Pardon me but I'm just not a believer in slack-tivism. If ya wanna move the needle ya got to hit'em where it hurts. Boycot FB. Boycot Twitter. Boycot Netflix. Boycot Amazon. Even if it's just for a day, those are all actions that will be heard. If Small Biz Saturday can be a thing, so can You Need Us More Than We Need You Friday. Okay. Agreed. The name needs some work.