Author: @SoDakCampaigns

Thune to FCC: Can’t Apply Old Rules of Telecom to New World of Internet

@SoDakCampaigns

Thune to FCC: Can’t Apply Old Rules of Telecom to New World of Internet

“… the Internet is not the telephone network, and you cannot apply the old rules of telecom to the new world of the Internet. Three weeks ago, three regulators turned their backs on that consensus, and I believe the Internet and its users will ultimately suffer for it.”

WASHINGTON, D.C.—U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, today at a hearing entitled, “Oversight of the Federal Communications Commission” questioned the five members of the FCC about its controversial Open Internet Order.

Video of the questions for the commissioners is here and remarks as prepared for delivery are below.

“Welcome to today’s oversight hearing on the Federal Communications Commission. Every day, every single American relies on some part of our nation’s vast communications system – the Internet, the telephone, television, GPS, or the radio. An efficient, effective communications system is the bedrock of our nation’s economy and it is the tie that binds together our 21st century society.

“The FCC sits right in the middle of America’s digital world. And this is even more true following the FCC’s recent decision to turn our nation’s broadband Internet infrastructure into a public utility. As is apparent from that action last month, the FCC is also a potentially threatening and unpredictable agency as it struggles to operate under legal authority designed nearly 100 years ago and not seriously updated in decades.

“To be clear, today’s hearing is not a response to the Title II order, but clearly no discussion about the FCC can ignore one of the most significant and most controversial decisions in the agency’s history. My views on this subject are well known. I believe there should be clear rules for the digital road with clear authority for the FCC to enforce them. I have put forward a draft bill with my House colleagues to begin the legislative discussion about how best to put such rules into statute. Like most first drafts, our draft bill is not perfect. I invite members of this committee and stakeholders from across the political spectrum to offer us ideas on how we can improve it, so that the final draft can win bipartisan support and provide everyone in the Internet world with the certainty that they need.

“The FCC’s recent action accomplished the exact opposite. Rather than exercising regulatory humility, the three majority commissioners chose to take the most radical, polarizing, and partisan path possible. Instead of working with me and my colleagues in the House and Senate on a bipartisan basis, to find a consensus, the three of you chose an option that I believe will only increase political, regulatory, and legal uncertainty, which will ultimately hurt average Internet users. Simply put, your actions jeopardize the open Internet that we are all seeking to protect.

“The tech and telecom industries agree on few regulatory matters, but there was one idea that unified them for nearly two decades – the Internet is not the telephone network, and you cannot apply the old rules of telecom to the new world of the Internet. Three weeks ago, three regulators turned their backs on that consensus, and I believe the Internet and its users will ultimately suffer for it.

“The debate over the open Internet illustrates the importance of the FCC, which makes it all the more amazing that Congress has not reauthorized the FCC since then-Representative Markey’s bill was passed a quarter century ago. Indeed, the FCC is the oldest expired authorization within this committee’s expansive jurisdiction – a situation that I intend to rectify this Congress.

“Today’s hearing marks the beginning of the Commerce Committee’s efforts to write and pass legislation to reauthorize the FCC. I know that contentious matters like Title II divide the membership of this committee, but FCC reauthorization is an area where I believe Republicans and Democrats can and should work together. Wanting the FCC to be an effective, efficient, and accountable regulator shouldn’t be a partisan goal. I know members on both sides of the aisle have common-sense ideas to make the agency more responsive to the needs of consumers, Congress, and regulated companies alike, and I look forward to hearing their suggestions and views. And I look forward to hearing the commissioners’ thoughts today about ways Congress can help their agency improve.

“Writing a new FCC reauthorization bill should not be a one-off effort. It is my hope that the committee will get back to regularly authorizing the commission as part of its normal course of business. In order to do that effectively, the committee must be diligent in its oversight. As such, the commission should expect to come before this committee again.

“How the commission works is just as important as what the commission does. In addition to discussing important communications policy matters, I hope members will use today’s hearing to explore the Commission’s operations, processes, and budget. For example, the FCC has requested $530 million dollars for Fiscal Year 2016. This funding level would be the highest in the Commission’s history. That alone raises eyebrows, particularly when American households continue to do more with less in this stagnant economy, but the FCC also wants to fund this increase in part by raiding the Universal Service Fund.

“Paying for record high budgets by siphoning money from USF is a dangerous precedent. While members of this committee may have varying views on the USF’s efficiency, scope, and growth, one thing I think we can all agree on is that its limited funds should not be used as a reserve fund to pay for the FCC’s core statutory functions.  That’s what the Commission’s regulatory fees are for.  USF funds should pay for USF services, and I don’t believe the FCC should jeopardize the stability and integrity of the Universal Service Fund in order to paper over its record high budget request.

“Given the significant interest in hearing from the commission today, I do not expect this hearing will be a short one. In order to more quickly get to members’ questions, I have asked that all the witnesses limit their oral statements to three minutes apiece. Their longer written statements will be submitted for the record.

“I look forward to hearing from our witnesses in what I hope will be a productive afternoon.”

###

Rumor Confirmed: Weiland forming liberal attack group with Johnson staffer. What would Harry Reid say? (Updated)

@SoDakCampaigns

I’m hearing reliable rumors out of Sioux Falls this afternoon that the Democrat’s loss leader, 3-time candidate Rick Weiland, is supposedly teaming up with former Tim Johnson Chief of Staff Drey Samuelson to form a new liberal attack dog group.

Word is that Weiland is pushing the story this afternoon with reporters about his new liberal group.

I suspect he’s forming this group in an attempt to remain nominally relevant. The outlook on it is somewhat doubtful, given his complete implosion at the end of his ill-fated US Senate campaign where he went on the attack against the DSCC.

No word on what Democratic US Senate Leader Harry Reid thinks about this latest Weiland effort.  Although, I suspect it would go along these lines:

“Desperation is an ugly thing, and it’s sad to see Rick Weiland ending his ill-advised campaign and brief political career by attacking fellow Democrats,” said Adam Jentleson, a spokesman for Reid.

Read it here.

Update – Yep. Scooped them again.

After I pointed out that Weiland was shopping the story, a rushed press release was dropped about his takeitback.org website. And once you look past his barfy platitudes, it looks like he’s setting up an organization to channel money to candidates through:

take_it_please

So, just like when he was campaigning, he’s once again demanding that people send him money to ‘take it back’ from special interest groups….

Just like the one he’s forming.

Rounds Calls for an End to Sequestration

@SoDakCampaigns

Rounds Calls for an End to Sequestration

 

WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee,  today at a hearing made the following remarks reinforcing his desire to end sequestration and increase spending for defense:

 

“I would like to briefly address an overarching theme that has dominated this committee’s dialog over many weeks.  That theme is, of course, the critical importance of properly funding our armed forces. We have heard over and over from leaders from throughout the Defense Department about the devastating impacts that would accompany sequestration.  But I believe sequestration is part of a larger threat to our defense establishment and our national security.  At a time of great fiscal pressures we can expect to see continued pressure for defense spending that is below a level of acceptable risk.  In short, we can expect to see as never before advocacy of a national security strategy that is budget and not strategy driven.  This committee is positioned to keep that from happening.  So I would like to take this opportunity to state my strong support and great appreciation for the ongoing efforts of Chairman McCain and Ranking Member Reed to not only avoid sequestration but to truly provide the funding levels needed to keep our nation safe.”

 

Full video of his remarks is available here: 

 

 

###

DNC Party Chair coming to SD to help Dems. Who have no one for her to help.

@SoDakCampaigns

This is a good one, and it’s been kept fairly quiet in the press.

Her donors hate her. The White House might not like her so much. She throws verbal-blunder bombs all over the place.  She says stuff so off the wall even CNN calls her out.

Yet, South Dakota Democrats led by Ann Tornberg are happily bringing in one of the most partisan people in the country, DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida to be their dinner speaker.  (As in one dinner, because that’s all they generally have.)

wasserman_dolt

It’s right there on their web site. But with no information. No “Read more here.”  It’s like they’re specifically downplaying her appearance.

So, on April 18th, the National Democrat Chairwoman is going to be in South Dakota to boost the SDDP.

If only Democrats had candidates for Wasserman Schultz to help.

And I missed this little news gem.. Is there anyone home at Democrat HQ?

@SoDakCampaigns

I missed this gem in the Associated Press version of the article about incoming Thune Campaign Manager Josh Shields. Former Teacher’s Union Boss Ann Tornberg is Democratic Party chair, and in charge of everything that they do.

And even she had to admit that against John Thune, ‘Dem’s got nothing’:

South Dakota Democratic Party Chairwoman Ann Tornberg says she’s not currently aware of any candidates that are interested in running against Thune. He ran unopposed for a second term in 2010.

Read it here.

But wait a minute? Why is Tornberg commenting?  Wasn’t there supposed to be someone else manning the shop by this time?

The South Dakota Democratic Party is looking for a new executive director.

And…

The Democrats are accepting applications for the position, which they hope to fill no later than Jan. 31.

Read that here.   And they also mentioned on their own web site:

The South Dakota Democratic Party plans to fill the Executive Director position before the end of January. Interested applicants can learn more about the position here: http://www.sddp.org/we-are-hiring/

Read that here.

But, two months later, they still have nothing. Much like I’d anticipate they’re going to have against Senator Thune next fall.  Nothing.

Daugaard still contemplating Minimum Wage Act

@SoDakCampaigns

According to an article on news center one’s website, the bill causing the governor to take the most pause is the measure to take those under 18 out of the equation for the minimum wage:

Daugaard says he will continue looking over it until he comes to a decision. “There’s about 28 bills that I still need to read through and make sure that I’m comfortable with the way the bill ended up. The youth minimum wage is one of them.

Read it here.

Thune Calls on Senate Democrats to Support TPA

@SoDakCampaigns

Thune Calls on Senate Democrats to Support TPA

“In my home state of South Dakota, 74 percent of exports go to countries with which the U.S. has a free trade agreement … Trade promotion authority has been the means by which nearly every U.S. free trade agreement has been negotiated. … That’s been a huge benefit to South Dakota farmers, ranchers, and manufacturers.”

 

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Today, U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), member of the Senate Finance Committee, took to the Senate floor to call on Senate Democrats to support trade promotion authority (TPA) to put American goods on an even playing field internationally. Thune noted the tremendous impact of trade on South Dakota’s agriculture industry, and mentioned the timeliness of the discussion particularly on today, National Agriculture Day.

 

Below is the video and transcript of Thune’s remarks.

 

 

“Mr. President, if there’s one thing Americans have made clear, it’s that they want their leaders to do something about the economy.

 

“The recession may have officially ended almost six years ago, but millions of Americans are still struggling economically, and opportunities are still few and far between.

 

“One big thing we can do to help the economy and expand opportunities for American workers is pass trade promotion authority, or TPA. 

 

“Our prior trade agreements have been a boon to the economy, providing American workers with jobs and American farmers, ranchers, and manufacturers with new markets for their goods.

 

“In my home state of South Dakota, 74 percent of exports go to countries with which the U.S. has a free trade agreement.

 

“Between 2005 and 2014, South Dakota saw a 110 percent increase in exports to free trade agreement countries.

 

“That’s been a huge benefit to South Dakota farmers, ranchers, and manufacturers.

 

“Speaking of farmers and trade, today is National Agriculture Day, and I’d just like to add as an aside that the substantial agriculture trade surplus the United States currently enjoys is a tribute to the efficiency and productivity of U.S. farmers and ranchers.

 

“I salute the U.S. farmers, ranchers, and agribusinesses who provide America – and the world – with a safe and abundant food supply.

 

“Passing trade promotion authority is one way we can ensure an even greater global expansion of U.S. agricultural trade.

 

“Mr. President, currently the administration is in the process of negotiating two new trade agreements that would open vast new markets for American products and put American goods on a level playing field internationally.

 

“The first of these agreements, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, is being negotiated with a number of Asia-Pacific nations including Australia, Japan, New Zealand, Singapore, and Vietnam.

                                                                                                                        

“Currently, American goods face heavy tariffs in many of these countries, at times as high as 85 percent.

 

“Tariffs of that size put American goods at an incredible disadvantage compared to their foreign competitors.

 

“Tariffs provide a powerful disincentive for citizens in other nations to purchase American products.

 

“Removing this disincentive would increase foreign demand for U.S. products, which would mean more business for U.S. farmers, ranchers, and manufacturers, and more jobs and opportunities for American workers.  

 

“That’s why negotiating the strongest possible Trans-Pacific trade agreement, as well as the agreement the United States is negotiating with the European Union, must be a priority.

 

“And for that we need trade promotion authority.

 

“Trade promotion authority has been the means by which nearly every U.S. free trade agreement has been negotiated.

 

“The idea behind TPA is simple.

 

“Congress sets the negotiating priorities the administration must follow and requires the administration to consult with Congress during the negotiating process.

 

“In return, Congress promises a simple up-or-down vote on the final agreement, instead of a lengthy amendment process that could leave the final agreement looking nothing like the deal the administration negotiated.

 

“The promise of that up-or-down vote on the final agreement is the key.

 

“That’s what gives our trading partners the confidence they need to put their best offers on the table, which allows for a successful conclusion of negotiations. 

 

“Trade promotion authority demonstrates that Congress and the administration are on the same page when it comes to the content of trade agreements and that the final agreement will be either accepted or rejected, not amended beyond recognition.  

 

“Mr. President, trade promotion authority expired in 2007, and Republicans have been pushing for renewing it ever since.

 

“The president is also on board, and he called for trade promotion authority in this year’s State of the Union address.

 

“This is an excellent chance for Democrats and Republicans to accomplish something significant for the American people and show that Washington is working again.

 

“Unfortunately, while the president and Republicans are united on this issue, many Senate Democrats continue to oppose this legislation.

 

“The chairman of the Senate Finance Committee is currently engaged in negotiations on a TPA bill with the committee’s ranking member, the senior senator from Oregon.

 

“We’re hopeful that these efforts will yield legislation that both Republicans and Democrats will support.

 

“Republicans are very open to suggestions and improvements.

 

“In fact, I expect a final agreement will include many elements advocated by the senior senator from Oregon and other Senate Democrats, such as greater transparency surrounding trade negotiations.

 

“However, the one thing Republicans can’t support is an attempt to undermine the core of TPA: that guaranteed up-or-down vote that gives other countries the confidence to put forward their best offers in trade negotiations.

 

“Simply put, we can’t afford to weaken TPA.

 

“Mr. President, if we fail to pass TPA, which will likely spell the failure of the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the U.S.-EU trade agreement, we won’t be maintaining the status quo.

 

“Just because we’re not negotiating agreements doesn’t mean other countries won’t be.

 

“Other countries will secure favorable treatment of their goods, and American goods will fall further and further behind.

 

“That’s not something we can afford in this economy.

 

“If we pass TPA, on the other hand, that will allow the Trans-Pacific trade agreement and the U.S.-EU trade agreement to move forward, which means American producers will benefit from new markets for their goods, and American workers will benefit from new jobs and opportunities.

 

“Since 2009, exports have accounted for more than 1 million new jobs here in the United States.

 

“If we pass the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the U.S.-EU trade agreement, we could be looking at more than a million more over the next few years.

 

“It’s time to pass TPA, get these agreements concluded, and let American workers and businesses start experiencing the benefits.”

 

###

….And what ever happened to Ms. Robinson?

@SoDakCampaigns

Speaking of the Democrat’s anorexic bench…..

Several weeks ago now in the tangle of chaos that is my life, I had a brief e-mail exchange from someone active in South Dakota politics who had previously had a close association with Corinna Robinson during the campaign.

You remember? Corinna Robinson – the person who moved from Virginia to South Dakota to run against Congresswoman elect Kristi Noem.   In fact, if I recall last April, she was the darling of the looney left who predicted she’d win handily with the rest of the Dem field:

So Dems, since Corinna Robinson will be seeking re-election to the House, and since Joe Lowe will be busy Governoring, and since I don’t think you’ll ever get Bernie Hunhoff to leave Yankton, who’s our pick to take out Thune and join Rick Weiland in the Senate in 2016?

Read that here. (And try not to laugh out loud as much as I did)

Anyway, getting away from delusional Democrats, and back to the conversation I was having with the Robinson staffer, it was an interesting e-mail exchange because the subject was that Corinna Robonson has literally gone off the radar.

Immediately after the election, Robinson had noted that Democrats were asking her “to stay the course,” but 4 months later, and even some of her own campaign people are saying she’s dropped off the map?

In fact, there have been no updates on her website, and nothing on Twitter since a single December tweet. And if you attempt to go to her former facebook campaign page at http://www.facebook.com/CorinnaforSD, it’s been taken off line and is no longer there.

Those aren’t the signs of a potential candidate seeking to remain engaged with the few people who supported her, who wants to build more support for a race that begins in less than 10 months.

But it is a sign that someone may be packing her bags, and scooting out the door to greener pastures.

So Dems, you’d better keep looking. Maybe Frank Kloucek is getting tired of hanging out in Scotland?