You are here

AT&T merger: Subverting the will of Congress on net Neutrality is not the "public interest"

Net neutrality proponents love to wax eloquently about respecting the "principles of democracy and freedom' -- for others that is -- but not themselves, becuase that would interfere with accomplishing their agenda. Apparently, for many net neutrality proponents, the "ends justify the means." Â Ã‚ 

The Itsournet coalition is effectively "mugging" the AT&T-Bell South merger over net neutrality. They are pressuring the Democratic Commissioners to hold up the merger which has already been approved by the DOJ and all the states, over a "fifth net neutrality principle."

Let's shine a bright light on what they are really doing. They are trying to force a policy change on one and only one company, when the House and Senate Commerce Committee both rejected this fifth principle in the last six months! They want the FCC, which is a constitutional creature of Congress, to thumb their noses at their constitutional masters -- all in the name of democracy and freedom!

Is it in the public interest to abuse the merger approval process to subvert the will of Congress? Last time I looked, FCC commissioners were not elected officials, but public servants who must answer to their constitutional superiors: Congress and the Courts.

Is it in the public interest to extort "special conditions" for "special interests?" The premise of these conditions depends on the assumption that their is insufficient competition to protect consumers -- a premise the Department of Justice (who has the statutory authority to judge that question) -- clearly rejected.

This is not about sound public policy or protecting the public interest, its about politics. Just like mugging someone in the dark of night net neutrality proponents are preying on a procedural vulnerability and mugging this company to extort gains that they could never get in the light of day or in the normal democratic policymaking process.  Â Ã‚ 

Net neutrality proponents have clearly lost their way. How can you truly be for "Internet democracy" if you have no respect of outcomes of our constitutional democratic process which is designed to protect freedoms? Â Ã‚