Senate Votes to Overturn FCC’s Net Neutrality Repeal

Actually overturning the repeal is a long shot, but the vote may influence midterm elections.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., speaks during the Senate Democrats' news conference to officially file petition to force a vote on net neutrality on Wednesday, May 9, 2018. ill Clark/Congressional Quarterly/Newscom via ZUMA Press

For indispensable reporting on the coronavirus crisis, the election, and more, subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter.

The Senate voted 52-47 today to overturn the Federal Communication Commission’s repeal of net neutrality rules. The proposal was backed by all 49 Senate Democrats, with three Republican senators, Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) voting in support of the measure. 

The vote was brought forward by Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and other Democrats under the Congressional Review Act, which allows Congress to review or roll back regulatory rules within 60 legislative days. The FCC’s rollback of net neutrality rules is set to go into effect June 11.

Actually overturning the FCC rules remains a long shot, however, because the House must also vote on the resolution, and the measure would then need final approval from President Trump. Both outcomes are unlikely. But the high-profile vote may have a stronger effect on midterm elections, as Democratic lawmakers attempt to position themselves as supporters of net neutrality. 

The FCC’s decision to repeal net neutrality rules has met staunch opposition. In January, 23 attorneys general filed a lawsuit against the FCC over the repeal, amid numerous other lawsuits from other groups. Several states, including Washington, Montana, and New York have passed laws preserving the rules in their state. Net neutrality principles mandated that internet service providers treat all content the same, and prevented them from creating “paid prioritization” or so-called “fast lanes” for certain services. Critics say that repealing the rules will increase costs for consumers, and make it more difficult for small businesses to compete with larger companies. Proponents of the repeal have argued that the rules are an overreach by the government that discourages innovation. 

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest