This Just In, Breaking News Stories..

Thought to make a thread for "this just in, breaking news stories"..

Good or Bad? Another way they tap into our freedom.. more money? Or is it really for the better?

WASHINGTON -- The Federal Communications Commission on Tuesday approved a plan to regulate the Internet despite warnings that it could strangle industry investment and damage an economy that is still struggling to recover.

The 3-2 vote fell along partisan lines with Democrats capitalizing on their numerical advantage.

The rules would prohibit phone and cable companies from abusing their control over broadband connections to discriminate against rival content or services, such as Internet phone calls or online video, or play favorites with Web traffic.

Lawmakers in both parties have been arguing for months that Congress, not the Obama administration, should take the lead role in deciding whether and how much to police the web. But despite a brief backing-off earlier in the year, the FCC pushed ahead with its new regulatory plan.

President Obama said in a statement that the plan "will help preserve the free and open nature of the Internet while encouraging innovation, protecting consumer choice, and defending free speech."

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski secured the three votes needed for approval, despite firm opposition from the two Republicans on the five-member commission.

Commissioner Robert McDowell, a Bush appointee, said the FCC's plan "appears to some as an obsessive quest to regulate at all costs."
"Some are saying that instead of acting as a cop on the beat, the FCC looks more like a regulatory vigilante," he said.
Genachowski's two fellow Democrats voted for the rules, even though they have said they consider them too weak.

Commissioner Michael Copps said Tuesday that he "seriously" considered voting against the plan.

"But it became ever more clear to me that without some action today the wheels of network neutrality would grind to a screeching halt for at least the next two years," he said.

The outcome caps a nearly 16-month push by Genachowski to pass "network neutrality" rules and marks a key turning point in a policy dispute that began more than five years ago.

Genachowski said he's proud of the process and the results, saying that the plan has drawn a wide range of support from technology and Internet companies to investors to labor, civil rights and consumer groups.

"Our framework has been supported by a number of broadband providers, as well, who recognize the sensible balance of our actions and the value of bringing a level of certainty to this broad issue," he said.

But the move raises concern that the FCC could soon have its regulatory foot in the door of the wild wild West of the Internet -- with an eye toward eventually exerting tighter control over content at a time when sites like WikiLeaks openly snub the government.

Republicans warn that the new rules would impose unnecessary regulations on an industry that is one of the few bright spots in the current economy, with phone and cable companies spending billions to upgrade their networks for broadband.

Burdensome net neutrality rules, they warn, would discourage broadband providers from continuing those upgrades by making it difficult for them to earn a healthy return on their investments.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell told President Obama on Tuesday to leave the Internet alone, arguing that his administration has already nationalized health care, banks and student loans.

"That's why I and GOP senators have urged the FCC chairman to back off," he said on the Senate floor.

Sen. John Cornyn, whose amendment to prevent the FCC from regulating the Internet was blocked from a vote last week by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, said he was "disappointed" by the FCC's vote.

"Clearly, the Obama administration did not hear the clarion call from Americans in November that stated that they did not want more government regulations and restrictions, like those imposed through the new health care law," he said in a written statement. "Instead of trying to encourage our economic recovery, this administration has become a shackle to innovation and growth in America."

Republicans, who will control the House and an additional five seats in the Senate in the next Congress, may try to overrule the regulation. Under the Congressional Review Act, Congress can strike down a regulation by passing a joint resolution.

A number of big Internet companies, including Netflix Inc., Skype and Amazon.com Inc., have previously expressed reservations about the plan as well.

But the FCC defended the new rules.

"We adopted today a strong and balanced order that has widespread support and that focuses on the importance of Internet freedom, the importance of private investment, the importance of business model experimentation," Genachowski said at a news conference after the vote. "That's why we have so many different people from various parts of the ecosystem supporting it. It's a strong and balanced order. And I'm looking forward to talking with anyone who is interested."

Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., a longtime supporter of net neutrality and author of the first ever net neutrality bill, said the FCC plan is not perfect and does not contain all the protections and priorities that he has advocated.

"Still, it does represent a step forward in the process of preserving the Internet as a vibrant marketplace for commerce and communications while fostering innovation and job creation now and in the future," he said in a statement.

The chairman's proposal builds on an attempt at compromise crafted by outgoing House Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., as well as a set of broad net neutrality principles first established by the FCC under the previous administration in 2005.

The rules would require broadband providers to let subscribers access all legal online content, applications and services over their wired networks -- including online calling services, Internet video and other Web applications that compete with their core businesses.

But the plan would give broadband providers flexibility to manage data on their systems to deal with problems such as network congestion and unwanted traffic like spam as long as they publicly disclose their network management practices.

Senior FCC officials stressed that unreasonable network discrimination would be prohibited.

They also noted that this category would most likely include services that favor traffic from the broadband providers themselves or traffic from business partners that can pay for priority. That language was added to help ease the concerns of Genachowski's two fellow Democrats.

The proposal would, however, leave the door open for broadband providers to experiment with routing traffic from specialized services such as smart grids and home security systems over dedicated networks as long as these services are separate from the public Internet.

Public interest groups fear that exception could lead to a two-tiered Internet -- with a fast lane for companies that can pay for priority and a slow lane for everyone else.

They are also worried that the proposal lacks strong protections for wireless networks as more Americans go online using mobile devices.

The plan would prohibit wireless carriers from blocking access to any websites or competing applications such as Internet calling services on mobile devices. It would require them to disclose their network management practices too.

But wireless companies would get more flexibility to manage data traffic as wireless systems have more bandwidth constraints than wired networks.

"We are concerned that if these companies are allowed to block the applications consumers can access over their iPhones or BlackBerry devices, there's nothing to keep them from censoring political speech," said Bob Edgar, president of Common Cause. "The commission should look to ensure that net neutrality is fully extended to the wireless world."

Still, Genachowski's proposal is likely to win the support of the big phone and cable companies because it leaves in place the FCC's current regulatory framework for broadband, which treats broadband as a lightly regulated "information service."

The Associated Press contributed to this report

Wow - that's a bit of a shocker.  I agree, it doesn't sound too good.

blue

isn't it a bit amazeing, mega big bussiness always rules. The small guy, or gal, then gets swept under the rug. what was the name of the guy who ran for president a few choices ago? Ross Perrot. I know I can visualize, how things might of changed. anywho
                                            Rico

What a lovely story.  Looks like he got himself a job too.

blue

That was very moving. thank You for that story.

Aww lips, that's a great story

I loved it Lips, thank you for sharing that!!!!

Oh my Gosh, thats just wonderful!

They just featured the guy with the golden voice on the news here in the UK.  He's now reported to have been offered full-time announcing work and living expenses by basketball team the Cleveland Cavaliers!

blue

I'm from Cleveland, & we're finding out all sorts of stuff about this guy...he's a convicted felon, has 9 kids he didn't support (PLEASE people, if u can't take care of yourself, DON'T bring innocent children in2 the mix), & who knows what else.  He says he's been clean/sober for 2 years...as 1 of our local radio hosts said, of COURSE he's clean/sober.  He's been homeless, w/ no means to purchase the stuff!' 
And the LAST thing our Cavaliers need right now is a convicted felon on the payroll
Sounds rotten, I know, but I'm waiting 2 hear the rest of the story b4 I start feeling warm & fuzzy

What I don't get is why he hasn't seen his mother for 20 years or however long it was. 

What stopped him visiting before?  Very odd.

blue

(CNN) -- At least 12 people were shot at a Tucson grocery store on Saturday, and U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was among them, a Democratic party source told CNN.

Giffords, 40, was holding a constituent meeting at the grocery store when the shooting occurred, according to a schedule posted on her website.

CNN could not confirm conditions for Giffords or any of the others wounded, but the Tuscon Citizen newspaper was reporting that Giffords was shot in the head.

The Democratic source described the situation as "pretty serious,"

The shooting occurred at a Safeway shortly after 10 a.m. MST, according to sheriff's spokesman Deputy Jason Ogan.


Several shot at Tuscon grocery store At least two victims with gunshot wounds were transported at Northwest Medical Center, according to spokesman Richard Parker.

"They've been coming in the last 10 minutes. I'm not sure of the severity of their injuries," he said.

Ogan said he did not have conditions on any of the wounded and said the motive for the shooting is unclear.

"We're just trying to sort this out right now," he said.

An employee of a nearby business, Jason Pekau, told CNN that he heard "15 to 20 gunshots."

Giffords, a Democrat, was first elected in 2006. She has served as chairwoman of the House Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee and also holds seats on the House Science and Technology and Armed Services committees.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/01/08/arizona.shooting/index.html

Now NPR and the Tuscon sheriff are reporting that U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords has passed away from her wounds.

A suspect is in custody and others have been reported killed in the shooting.

Such a sad day, and here I was complaining about no free tourney...

Sorry Folks. NPR retracted that statement. However, she's in critical condition. Sadly a 9 year old child was one of the fatalities :'( :'( :'(

Also, 4-5 other s are reported dead....I just hear/see this and presonally I am a Republican leaning person, but I would never accept this as a way to change government.

I cannot fathom the depths some people go to to get their way...(SIGH)

That is just terrible Man,what is wrong with people??.Makes me want to stay inside AND bolt the doors.

Sick b***ard.

Scuse me for that word but that is really sick.

blue

it's ok blue...once in jail, he's gonna have somethin' explode inside HIS @$$, and he ain't gonna like it

***WARNING*** The national weather service has issued a falling bird warning for Chicago on Sunday starting at 12:00 noon and continuing until the end of the fourth quarter. Falling Seahawks could be heavy at times especially around the Soldier Field area. Heavy accumulation is likely! *BEARS NATION! WE ARE EVERYWHERE!*

YAY! Me too gene. I flipped when I saw the forcast 

That is beyond sick!! What a pervert!!

DA BEARS!!!!! Love the post froggy,too cute!!!

***WARNING*** The national weather service has issued a falling bird warning for Chicago on Sunday starting at 12:00 noon and continuing until the end of the fourth quarter. Falling Seahawks could be heavy at times especially around the Soldier Field area. Heavy accumulation is likely! *BEARS NATION! WE ARE EVERYWHERE!*

US calls for ban on in-car phone use, even with Bluetooth..

By NBC News' Tom Costello and msnbc.com's Alex Johnson
Updated at 1:45 p.m. ET: The government's transportation safety experts recommended Tuesday to ban all American drivers from using portable electronic devices — including cell phones, even if you use a hands-free device.

The recommendation, which isn't binding but which is likely to influence the decisions of Congress and state legislatures in writing  new safety laws, makes only two exceptions: You could still use GPS navigation devices, and you could use your cell phone in an emergency.

Besides calling for government action, the NTSB also urged consumer electronics manufacturers to figure out a way to "disable the functions of portable electronic devices within reach of the driver when a vehicle is in motion" while at the same time allowing the driver to make a call in an emergency.

Spokesmen for the Consumer Electronics Association and CTIA—The Wireless Association did not immediately return calls for comment on whether such a device is possible .

"No call, no text, no update, is worth a human life," Deborah Hersman, chairwoman of the National Transportation Safety Board, said at a news conference in Washington.

Safety advocates have long called for such a ban to reduce the phenomenon of distracted driving, which the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says killed 3,092 people in 2010.

"People continue to make bad decisions about driving distracted — but what's clear from all of the information we have is that driver distraction continues to be a major problem," NHTSA Administrator David Strickland said last week in reporting the numbers.

But similar studies linking cellphone use to poor driving have been challenged, most recently by researchers at Wayne State University in Detroit, who concluded last month that some earlier studies were seriously flawed.

The report, published in the journal Epidemiology, examined to earlier studies that examined crashes in which cellphone records showed that the driver had used a cellphone. Those studies "likely overestimated the relative risk for cell phone conversations," the researchers said, because they improperly assumed that the drivers were actually in motion when they were on the phone — in other words, they didn't factor in such so-called part-time driving.

Only 10 states ban handheld devices right now, and 35 ban texting while driving.

The recommendation comes following the NTSB's investigation of an August 2010 accident in Gray's Summit, Mo., involving a pickup truck, two school buses and several other vehicles.

The accident was blamed on the 19-year-old driver of the pickup, who sent or received 11 texts in the 11 minutes before the pileup, which killed two people and injured 38 others.

"That finding raises a red flag to all of us on the highways," Hersman said.

The NTSB recommendation wouldn't cover GPS devices, but — if it eventually becomes law — it would ban using your phone for any reason, even with a Bluetooth headset or speakers. The only exception would be to call 911 in an emergency.

I totally agree, you have to be fully focused on the road when driving because it's not only your life that's at stake there. How would you feel if you would kill somebody just because you were caught in a phone conversation? Definitely not worth it.

Cell phones are overused anyway in my view. I remember that when there were no cell phones people lied way less. If you had a meeting with somebody chances are that the meeting was going to take place at the scheduled time and place. Now you can just call and invent a tiny lie if running late or even cancel if you don't feel like it.