Rand Paul Technology

Rand Paul Introduces Resolution to Block Net Neutrality

Kentucky senator and presidential candidate Rand Paul is reasserting his libertarian bona fides by reiterating his belief that corporations should have the liberty(!) and freedom(!) to monopolize and pillage an essential public utility.

via Reuters

Paul's resolution, if adopted, would allow the Senate to fast-track a vote to establish that Congress disapproves of the FCC's new rules and moves to nullify them. [...]

"The Internet has successfully flourished without the heavy hand of government interference," Paul said in a statement. "Stated simply, I do not want to see the government regulating the Internet."

Without the "heavy hand of the government" the internet wouldn't exist, but I digress.

Unlike some of his other recent policy positions, this is perfectly in line with Paul's ideology. It is, however, yet another sign that he is not a secret liberal ally. Rand son of Ron worships at the alter of Corporate America just like any other Republican.

If a telecommunications company stifles access and innovation in your area with a lack of investment and poor service, the Market will take care of that unless, of course, it doesn't because your local provider is both a service monopoly and a media monstrosity that owns half of all programming and makes its owns rules.

  • Christopher Foxx

    Unlike some of his other recent policy positions, this is perfectly in line with Paul’s ideology

    Every single resolution and propsal Paul has ever made has been perfectly in line with his ideology.

    His ideology, of course, being “Taking whatever position I need to in the moment.”

  • Scopedog

    Yeah, but Hillary’s worse than this guy, according to Robert Scheer and a good chunk of supporters of Senator Sanders.

    …But in all seriousness (well, it’s true about Scheer’s desire to put his lips on Rand’s keister: http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a34369/the-first-great-debate-is-on/)
    this is further proof that Senator Paul has no damned clue about what he’s talking about. Then again, that clueless behavior is echoed on the dudebro/Snowden suckers/free culture gang, who keep forgetting that the Internet started as a project from the US Government.

    I need a drink.

    • nathkatun7

      Well said scopedog. I think I will join you in that drink.

  • Draxiar

    Using Rand’s “logic” I suppose he’d be all for towns and states setting up tolls on every single road. Back roads might cost less, highways might cost more. If you can afford to pay for the privilege of driving on the highway you’ll get to your destination faster…if you can’t then you’ll be on the byways stuck in traffic with thousands of other people.

    What Rand has failed to realize (and will likely never realize) is that not everything is free market compatible. Some things are ubiquitously pro bono and shouldn’t be held to the standard of profit. The internet is one of them.

  • bphoon

    Yeah, much better to have corporations “regulate” the internet…like it’s much better to have insurance bureaucrats between you and your physician than government bureaucrats…

    Same song, second verse

  • muselet

    That Rand Paul is gibbering about how awful it is to require ISPs to treat all traffic equally is as surprising as the sunrise, because Rand Paul is not a serious person.

    The buried lede in the Reuters article is the seventh paragraph:

    The rules ban Internet providers from blocking or slowing down any websites and from striking deals with content companies for smoother downloads. Internet providers say they oppose not those principles themselves but the FCC’s decision to set those rules by dramatically changing the regulatory regime, which gives the agency much wider authority over the Internet.

    You see, say the big ISPs, it’s not the rules (the ones we’ve been busily lobbying against, in the most apocalyptic terms our PR people can devise), it’s the new regulatory regime (which is not exactly onerous, since all we’d have to do is keep doing what we did without complaint for a couple of decades). It certainly has nothing to do with charging more for faster, more reliable handling of a company’s traffic—and making that a new profit center—perish the thought!

    The Right won’t realize what they’re supporting until they discover that Infowars has been throttled back by TWC or Comcast because Alex Jones won’t cough up for “fast lane” treatment. And then of course they’ll blame Them Damn’ Libruls! for it.

    What happens after the Rs let the ISPs break the internet, I wonder?


  • fry1laurie

    Poor deluded moron didn’t even reach Charlie Pierce’s five-minute rule on this one.