FCC chief: Loosen oversight of high-speed internet firms
WASHINGTON — The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission on Wednesday outlined a sweeping plan to loosen the government’s oversight of highspeed internet providers, a rebuke of a landmark policy approved two years ago to ensure that all online content is treated the same by the companies that deliver broadband service to Americans.
The chairman, Ajit Pai, said high-speed internet service should no longer be treated like a public utility with strict rules, as it is now. Instead, he said, the industry should largely be left to police itself.
The pl a n i s Pai ’s most forceful action in his race to roll back rules that govern telecommunications, cable and broadcasting companies, which he says are harmful to business.
But he is certain to face a contentious battle with consumers and tech companies that rallied around the existing rules, which are meant to prevent broadband providers like AT&T and Comcast from giving special treat- ment to any streaming videos, news sites and other content.
His plan, though still vague in details, is a sharp change from the approach taken by the last FCC administration, which approved rules governing a concept known as net neutrality in 2015.
The rules were intended to ensure an open internet, meaning that no content could be blocked by broadband providers and that the internet is not divided into pay-to-play fast lanes for internet and media companies that can afffffffffffford it and slow lanes for everyone else.
A federal judge on Wednesday struck down a Louisiana law requiring doctors who perform abortions to have permission to admit patients to a nearby hospital, citing a U.S. Supreme Court decision against a similar Texas law. U.S. District Judge John deGravelles had barred the state from enforcing the law in a preliminary opinion saying it was unconstitutional, but a federal appeals court overruled him. However, the state agreed to wait on enforcement, and since then, the nation’s highest court has overturned the same appeals court’s decision. Supporters said doctors need to be able to admit patients to a hospital within 30 miles in case of medical complications. Opponents said the law was meant to make it essentially impossible for women to obtain abortions.