Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Chuck Profito]

TOM DeREGGI, 

 I would like to make you a Serious Business Offer. OK?


Seriously. This is a real offer. In fact, you really can't turn me down, as
you'll come to understand in a moment.

Here's the deal. You're going to start a business or expand the one you've
got now. It doesn't really matter what you do or what you're going to do.
I'll partner with you no matter what business you're in - as long as it's
legal.

But I can't give you any capital - you have to come up with that on your
own. I won't give you any labor - that's definitely up to you. What I will
do, however, is demand you follow all sorts of rules about what products and
services you can offer, how much (and how often) you pay your employees, and
where and when you're allowed to operate your business. That's my role in
the affair - to tell you what to do.

Now in return for my rules, I'm going to take roughly half of whatever you
make in the business each year. Half seems fair, doesn't it? I think so. Of
course, that's half of your profits.

You're also going to have to pay me about 12% of whatever you decide to pay
your employees because you've got to cover my expenses for promulgating all
the rules about who you can employ, when, where, and how. Come on, you're my
partner. It's only "fair."

Now. after you've put your hard-earned savings at risk to start this
business, and after you've worked hard at it for a few decades (paying me my
50% or a bit more along the way each year), you might decide you'd like to
cash out - to finally live the good life.

Whether or not this is "fair" - some people never can afford to retire - is
a different argument. As your partner, I'm happy for you to sell whenever
you'd like. because our agreement says if you sell, you have to pay me an
additional 20% of whatever the capitalized value of the business is at that
time.

I know. I know. you put up all the original capital. You took all the risks.
You put in all the labor. That's all true. But I've done my part, too. I've
collected 50% of the profits each year. And I've always come up with more
rules for you to follow each year. Therefore, I deserve another, final 20%
slice of the business.

Oh. and one more thing.

Even after you've sold the business and paid all my fees. I'd recommend
buying lots of life insurance. You see, even after you've been retired for
years, when you die, you'll have to pay me 50% of whatever your estate is
worth.

After all, I've got lots of partners and not all of them are as successful
as you and your family. We don't think it's "fair" for your kids to have
such a big advantage. But if you buy enough life insurance, you can finance
this expense for your children.

All in all, if you're a very successful entrepreneur. if you're one of the
rare, lucky, and hard-working people who can create a new company, employ
lots of people, and satisfy the public. you'll end up paying me more than
75% of your income over your life. Thanks so much.

I'm sure you'll think my offer is reasonable and happily partner with me.
But it doesn't really matter how you feel about it because if you ever try
to stiff me - or cheat me on any of my fees or rules - I'll break down your
door in the middle of the night, threaten you and your family with heavy,
automatic weapons, and throw you in jail.

That's how civil society is supposed to work, right? This is Amerika, isn't
it?

That's the offer Amerika gives its entrepreneurs. And the idiots in
Washington wonder why there are no new jobs.

 

This Is Why There Are No Jobs in America

HYPERLINK "http://www.stansberryresearch.com"www.stansberryresearch.com

 

 

Chuck Profito

209-988-7388

CV-Access, Inc.

www.cv-access.com / cprofito'at'cv-access.com  

Providing Broadband Internet Access to 

California's Rural Central Valley

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 6:18 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

 

In support of your points

 

On the news the other day, they pointed out a dituation where the city of
Wash DC is having the cops harrass the Bicycle Taxis, and got Politions on
the record saying that they are trying to find a way to regulate them.  The
count is something like 50 total bucycle Taxi across the city. Isn't this a
bit extreme and wasteful to go after a few bicycle riders? They literally
work hard to give others enjoyment, a public good.  My point here is...  if
the government can see it, they will try to regulate it.  Thats what
governments do, they regulate things.  The government really needs to stop,
they are sticking their nose into way to many busin

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Tom DeReggi]

In support of your points

On the news the other day, they pointed out a dituation where the city of Wash 
DC is having the cops harrass the Bicycle Taxis, and got Politions on the 
record saying that they are trying to find a way to regulate them.  The count 
is something like 50 total bucycle Taxi across the city. Isn't this a bit 
extreme and wasteful to go after a few bicycle riders? They literally work hard 
to give others enjoyment, a public good.  My point here is...  if the 
government can see it, they will try to regulate it.  Thats what governments 
do, they regulate things.  The government really needs to stop, they are 
sticking their nose into way to many businesses, taking regulation to a point 
of harrasment instead of a public good.  Its the whole thing about making 
regulation in search of a problem, instead of the proper way which is 
indentifying a clear problem and regulating to solve it. Or in my opinion, to 
get out of the way and let the free market solve it.  

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


  - Original Message - 
  From: MDK 
  To: WISPA General List 
  Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 8:57 PM
  Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire


  Mark, you seem to think that what I'm advocating is a 'dream' or some kind of 
old fashioned fantasy.  To correct your mistake here, I must point out that the 
"system" you seem to want to continue has brought this nation to the brink of 
bankrtuptcy, destroyed our industrial and scientific base, our technology base 
has eroded, our information age has enabled our competitors now, and we're 
rapidly proceeding to a nation full of people who  feed each other at 
mcdonald's, mow each other's lawns, provide internet, and lend each other money 
- or, in terms of reality, a fantasy.  

  The history of our current telecom industry points to only one thing... 
Congress is wholesale inept at regulating business, services or industry.   We 
have 5 bazillion laws, all being targeted for efforts to gain advantage for 
this or that segment, or for this, or against that industry.  While we have 
played in the tide pools, away from the ocean sized breakers of Congressional 
and Federal controls, it has abundantly clear that what is going on is not 
sustainable, not good, not even faintly viable.   

  I am not advocating a fantasy... I am advocating a restoration of the PROPER 
governance our constitution provided and served us so incredibly well while we 
stuck to it.  And, has done such immense damage when we ignored it. 

  I am confused about why you think that WISPA and all other ISP organizations 
should not propose a clear philosophical message that FREE MARKETS WORK.  Duhh, 
we know they do, we compete as best we can, hobbled by the regulatory structure 
that grants others certain advantages, etc.  There's NOTHING wrong with the 
idea that Congress should set about undoing the sins of the last generations.  

  Furthermore, as someone said, WISPA itself should, just because it is an 
advocacy organization, have a clear and unambiguous philosophy on what the 
organization is going to advocate for, not just WHO it advocates for - and I 
recall the heated discussions on that topic.  


  ++
  Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
  541-969-8200  509-386-4589
  ++





--




  

  WISPA Wants You! Join today!
  http://signup.wispa.org/
  

   
  WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

  Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
  http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

  Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[MDK]

The thing is, he has no constitutional authority for ANY of this.  

Instead, we have the three blind mice trying to make the country work.   WE 
know what we're doing and how to get it done.  They need to respect that they 
don't know squat and need to get the heck out of the way.  

++
Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
541-969-8200  509-386-4589
++


From: Mark Nash 
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 12:28 PM
To: WISPA General List 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire


As much as I can feel for you Sam, put yourself in 
government-man-decision-maker shoes.  Put your money where you think it will be 
successful, and small players can't provide that assurance.  It's just too much 
of a gamble.  That's how I would feel I would think.  This is a high-tech 
service better left up to high-tech companies. (from their perspective).  Never 
mind that there is success happening in small doses everywhere.  It's a 
question of confidence and CYA'ing on the part of the decision-makers.




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Rick Harnish]

AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson spoke at the National Association of Regulatory
Utility Commissioners summer meeting in Los Angeles, where he called his
company's copper-based DSL broadband technology "obsolete."

This is a stunning admission from one of the nation's largest DSL providers.
As AT&T focuses more and more on wireless and continues pushing its
fiber-to-the-node services instead of faster fiber-to-the-home or even
cable, it's leaving millions of Americans in the dust. And today its CEO
just admitted as much. For many in rural areas DSL is the only option, and
as of the end of AT&T's first quarter it still has roughly 10.2 million DSL
subscribers. And it's not as if AT&T plans to continue upgrading all of its
customers over to U-verse. Earlier this year, AT&T executive John Stankey
told an investor conference that the company would likely halt its building
plans after it brings the technology to about 55 percent to 60 percent of
the homes it serves. Stankey also admitted that about 20 percent of the
homes in AT&T's service area are "not a heavy emphasis for investment." But
if DSL is "obsolete" as Stephenson says, then what about the Americans who
are forced to rely on that as their only method of broadband access?

 

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Sam Tetherow
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 2:52 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

 

But the issue is not that we can't compete in the market, but that the
government is making it more lucrative for the bigger players to compete in
our markets (and not providing those incentives to the smaller players).  I
currently compete against DSL, cable and cellular for over 80% of my subs, I
don't need the government making it even easier for them.


On 7/20/11 10:28 AM, Mark Nash wrote: 

I honestly don't think we're working with the government so much as we're
working with the market.

We are a bunch of Davids trying to play in a game that is dominated by
Goliaths.  I know how that bible fable goes so we don't need to get
sidetracked on a lecture about how that story ended...  My point is that our
"market" has huge players affecting change and us small guys have been able
to succeed to varying degrees BECAUSE we haven't been on the radar.  

Our government fully believes that the best-suited companies to deliver
broadband to the masses are these bigger players, and I tend to agree with
them.  I've always considered myself a "niche" provider, and as soon as the
nice becomes attractive to a company with real money, slow or fast, I will
realize the inevitable decline of my wireless business.  Not because of the
government, but because of the market.

For myself, this uphill battle is stress better left up to someone else.  My
business plans are to ride the wireless wave as long as I can, and venture
into other businesses and make them valuable with the revenues generated by
the wireless business.  I just released the first version of my first
iPhone/iPad game on Apple's App Store, for instance.  I'm thinking of
starting a landscaping business (not WORKING it, just owning it).  I think a
music/movie studio is in my future.  Eggs in several baskets.  That kind of
thing.  In the meantime, the wireless business has to be tended to and made
everything it can be.

On 7/19/2011 7:20 PM, RickG wrote: 

Mark,

You just made my point, it appears to me that WISPA, many WISP's, and small
business owners in general have done their best to work with the "system".
And what rewards do we get for it? I dont know about you but the "system" is
killing me! Mark my words, unless things change, the "system" that is
beginning to fail us now will eventually totally fail us. Sorry for sounding
so pessimistic but after watching our government at "work" after 35 years,
the only thing positive is that it can change if we want it to but it's
gonna be a long, hard fight.   

On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Mark Nash  wrote:

You absolutely have a right to chase your dreams in this country, as opposed
to other countries.  But you have to temper yourself with the absolute fact
that you belong to a system.  Successful business owners either work within
the system, or find a way around it.  Do what you can, when you can, to
affect change, but to try to wholesale uproot the system is going to cause
you persistent pain and anguish. 



On 7/19/2011 8:15 AM, Andy Trimmell wrote: 

+1

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of RickG
Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2011 9:04 PM
To: fai...@snappydsl.net; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

 

"it is Regulation (1996 Telecom Act) that
allowed us (ISP's) to be able to

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[David E. Smith]

On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 14:32, Mike Hammett wrote:

> **
> I think people are saying the government needs to stop "helping" everyone.
>

Some people are saying that, others are saying that the help needs to be
spread around a bit more fairly (for some value of "fair").

David Smith
MVN.net



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Sam Tetherow]

But the issue is not that we can't compete in the market, but that the 
government is making it more lucrative for the bigger players to compete 
in our markets (and not providing those incentives to the smaller 
players).  I currently compete against DSL, cable and cellular for over 
80% of my subs, I don't need the government making it even easier for them.



On 7/20/11 10:28 AM, Mark Nash wrote:
I honestly don't think we're working with the government so much as 
we're working with the market.


We are a bunch of Davids trying to play in a game that is dominated by 
Goliaths.  I know how that bible fable goes so we don't need to get 
sidetracked on a lecture about how that story ended...  My point is 
that our "market" has huge players affecting change and us small guys 
have been able to succeed to varying degrees BECAUSE we haven't been 
on the radar.


Our government fully believes that the best-suited companies to 
deliver broadband to the masses are these bigger players, and I tend 
to agree with them.  I've always considered myself a "niche" provider, 
and as soon as the nice becomes attractive to a company with real 
money, slow or fast, I will realize the inevitable decline of my 
wireless business.  Not because of the government, but because of the 
market.


For myself, this uphill battle is stress better left up to someone 
else.  My business plans are to ride the wireless wave as long as I 
can, and venture into other businesses and make them valuable with the 
revenues generated by the wireless business.  I just released the 
first version of my first iPhone/iPad game on Apple's App Store, for 
instance.  I'm thinking of starting a landscaping business (not 
WORKING it, just owning it).  I think a music/movie studio is in my 
future.  Eggs in several baskets.  That kind of thing.  In the 
meantime, the wireless business has to be tended to and made 
everything it can be.


On 7/19/2011 7:20 PM, RickG wrote:

Mark,

You just made my point, it appears to me that WISPA, many WISP's, and 
small business owners in general have done their best to work with 
the "system". And what rewards do we get for it? I dont know about 
you but the "system" is killing me! Mark my words, unless things 
change, the "system" that is beginning to fail us now will eventually 
totally fail us. Sorry for sounding so pessimistic but after watching 
our government at "work" after 35 years, the only thing positive is 
that it can change if we want it to but it's gonna be a long, hard 
fight.


On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Mark Nash <mailto:markl...@uwol.net>> wrote:


You absolutely have a right to chase your dreams in this country,
as opposed to other countries.  But you have to temper yourself
with the absolute fact that you belong to a system.  Successful
business owners either work within the system, or find a way
around it.  Do what you can, when you can, to affect change, but
to try to wholesale uproot the system is going to cause you
persistent pain and anguish.


On 7/19/2011 8:15 AM, Andy Trimmell wrote:


+1

*From:*wireless-boun...@wispa.org
<mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org>
[mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] *On Behalf Of *RickG
*Sent:* Saturday, July 16, 2011 9:04 PM
    *To:* fai...@snappydsl.net <mailto:fai...@snappydsl.net>; WISPA
General List
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

"it is Regulation (1996 Telecom Act) that
allowed us (ISP's) to be able to go into the business of providing
internet access and other communication services"

*With all due respect, it's exactly the mindset that government
"allows" us to be in business that IS the problem. Telecom Act
or no, regulation or no, there should be no question that we are
allowed to make a living the way we want to regardless.*

On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Faisal Imtiaz
mailto:fai...@snappydsl.net>> wrote:

I am going to address your points backwards:-

You wrote ---

And lastly, about the FCC, the last administration's appointees were
advocates for free markets and for competition and deregulation. Not
particularly effective ones, but at least they were not our
enemy. The
current administration's people at the FCC are IN NO WAY our
friend, for
any way, manner, or purpose, and everything they want is bad for
us and
the country. STop talking political party talking points, and
get some
reality.

-

We have been wireline ISP's first, since 2000, if you really believe
what you wrote (above) then you are truly mis-informed...
The simple facts are ... it is Regulation (1996 Telecom Act) that
allowed us (ISP's) to b

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Mark Nash]

I honestly don't think we're working with the government so much as 
we're working with the market.


We are a bunch of Davids trying to play in a game that is dominated by 
Goliaths.  I know how that bible fable goes so we don't need to get 
sidetracked on a lecture about how that story ended...  My point is that 
our "market" has huge players affecting change and us small guys have 
been able to succeed to varying degrees BECAUSE we haven't been on the 
radar.


Our government fully believes that the best-suited companies to deliver 
broadband to the masses are these bigger players, and I tend to agree 
with them.  I've always considered myself a "niche" provider, and as 
soon as the nice becomes attractive to a company with real money, slow 
or fast, I will realize the inevitable decline of my wireless business.  
Not because of the government, but because of the market.


For myself, this uphill battle is stress better left up to someone 
else.  My business plans are to ride the wireless wave as long as I can, 
and venture into other businesses and make them valuable with the 
revenues generated by the wireless business.  I just released the first 
version of my first iPhone/iPad game on Apple's App Store, for 
instance.  I'm thinking of starting a landscaping business (not WORKING 
it, just owning it).  I think a music/movie studio is in my future.  
Eggs in several baskets.  That kind of thing.  In the meantime, the 
wireless business has to be tended to and made everything it can be.


On 7/19/2011 7:20 PM, RickG wrote:

Mark,

You just made my point, it appears to me that WISPA, many WISP's, and 
small business owners in general have done their best to work with the 
"system". And what rewards do we get for it? I dont know about you but 
the "system" is killing me! Mark my words, unless things change, the 
"system" that is beginning to fail us now will eventually totally fail 
us. Sorry for sounding so pessimistic but after watching our 
government at "work" after 35 years, the only thing positive is that 
it can change if we want it to but it's gonna be a long, hard fight.


On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Mark Nash <mailto:markl...@uwol.net>> wrote:


You absolutely have a right to chase your dreams in this country,
as opposed to other countries.  But you have to temper yourself
with the absolute fact that you belong to a system.  Successful
business owners either work within the system, or find a way
around it.  Do what you can, when you can, to affect change, but
to try to wholesale uproot the system is going to cause you
persistent pain and anguish.


On 7/19/2011 8:15 AM, Andy Trimmell wrote:


+1

*From:*wireless-boun...@wispa.org
<mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org>
[mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] *On Behalf Of *RickG
*Sent:* Saturday, July 16, 2011 9:04 PM
    *To:* fai...@snappydsl.net <mailto:fai...@snappydsl.net>; WISPA
General List
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

"it is Regulation (1996 Telecom Act) that
allowed us (ISP's) to be able to go into the business of providing
internet access and other communication services"

*With all due respect, it's exactly the mindset that government
"allows" us to be in business that IS the problem. Telecom Act or
no, regulation or no, there should be no question that we are
allowed to make a living the way we want to regardless.*

On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Faisal Imtiaz
mailto:fai...@snappydsl.net>> wrote:

I am going to address your points backwards:-

You wrote ---

And lastly, about the FCC, the last administration's appointees were
advocates for free markets and for competition and deregulation. Not
particularly effective ones, but at least they were not our
enemy. The
current administration's people at the FCC are IN NO WAY our
friend, for
any way, manner, or purpose, and everything they want is bad for
us and
the country. STop talking political party talking points, and get
some
reality.

-

We have been wireline ISP's first, since 2000, if you really believe
what you wrote (above) then you are truly mis-informed...
The simple facts are ... it is Regulation (1996 Telecom Act) that
allowed us (ISP's) to be able to go into the business of providing
internet access and other communication services . and it is THE
DEREGULATION over the past 5 years, that has been KILLING the
ISP's  off.
You forget, that if you don't have the ability to connect to other
networks in a fair and equitable manner, you are not going to be
able to
continue in this business.
Get a grip of rea

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[RickG]

Mark,

You just made my point, it appears to me that WISPA, many WISP's, and small
business owners in general have done their best to work with the "system".
And what rewards do we get for it? I dont know about you but the "system" is
killing me! Mark my words, unless things change, the "system" that is
beginning to fail us now will eventually totally fail us. Sorry for sounding
so pessimistic but after watching our government at "work" after 35 years,
the only thing positive is that it can change if we want it to but it's
gonna be a long, hard fight.

On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Mark Nash  wrote:

>  You absolutely have a right to chase your dreams in this country, as
> opposed to other countries.  But you have to temper yourself with the
> absolute fact that you belong to a system.  Successful business owners
> either work within the system, or find a way around it.  Do what you can,
> when you can, to affect change, but to try to wholesale uproot the system is
> going to cause you persistent pain and anguish.
>
>
> On 7/19/2011 8:15 AM, Andy Trimmell wrote:
>
>  +1
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* wireless-boun...@wispa.org 
> [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
> *On Behalf Of *RickG
> *Sent:* Saturday, July 16, 2011 9:04 PM
> *To:* fai...@snappydsl.net; WISPA General List
> *Subject:* Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire
>
> ** **
>
> "it is Regulation (1996 Telecom Act) that
> allowed us (ISP's) to be able to go into the business of providing
> internet access and other communication services"
>
> *With all due respect, it's exactly the mindset that government "allows"
> us to be in business that IS the problem. Telecom Act or no, regulation or
> no, there should be no question that we are allowed to make a living the way
> we want to regardless.*
>
> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Faisal Imtiaz 
> wrote:
>
> I am going to address your points backwards:-
>
> You wrote ---
>
> And lastly, about the FCC, the last administration's appointees were
> advocates for free markets and for competition and deregulation. Not
> particularly effective ones, but at least they were not our enemy. The
> current administration's people at the FCC are IN NO WAY our friend, for
> any way, manner, or purpose, and everything they want is bad for us and
> the country. STop talking political party talking points, and get some
> reality.
>
> -
>
> We have been wireline ISP's first, since 2000, if you really believe
> what you wrote (above) then you are truly mis-informed...
> The simple facts are ... it is Regulation (1996 Telecom Act) that
> allowed us (ISP's) to be able to go into the business of providing
> internet access and other communication services . and it is THE
> DEREGULATION over the past 5 years, that has been KILLING the ISP's  off.
> You forget, that if you don't have the ability to connect to other
> networks in a fair and equitable manner, you are not going to be able to
> continue in this business.
> Get a grip of reality and the full picture.. you are playing with a DUAL
> EDGE sword here...
>
> ---You wrote-
>
>
> You seem to think that the answer is to find the right pol to influence and
> the right committee members to lobby and the right allies to obstruct X or
> advance Y, but those are expediency, not principle.   They should be
> TACTICS
> to a principled purpose, one that will attract others, on the basis of its
> soundness and validity.
>
> 
> Not sure where you are coming up with this from ...however each and
> every one has his own right to interpret the events .
>
> You wrote -
>
>
> Additionally, I said absolutely NOTHING partisan.   Not even ideological.
> It's simple straightforward business principles.   Principle Numero Uno is
> "have the freedom to be in business", and there is nothing convoluted or
> difficult about that.
>
> 
> hehe.. when you start off a paragraph with "this administration"  or do
> a follow up with "the previous administration".. that is as partisan as
> one can get
>
> I agree with your 'Principle Numero Uno', but you are harking at the
> wrong organization.. it is not in  WISPA's charter or mission, maybe
> should be a member of the SBA association, or FISPA or COMPTEL ... but
> then again you will have to get your head straight about how the US Gov.
> has operated for the

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[MDK]

Mark, you seem to think that what I'm advocating is a 'dream' or some kind of 
old fashioned fantasy.  To correct your mistake here, I must point out that the 
"system" you seem to want to continue has brought this nation to the brink of 
bankrtuptcy, destroyed our industrial and scientific base, our technology base 
has eroded, our information age has enabled our competitors now, and we're 
rapidly proceeding to a nation full of people who  feed each other at 
mcdonald's, mow each other's lawns, provide internet, and lend each other money 
- or, in terms of reality, a fantasy.  

The history of our current telecom industry points to only one thing... 
Congress is wholesale inept at regulating business, services or industry.   We 
have 5 bazillion laws, all being targeted for efforts to gain advantage for 
this or that segment, or for this, or against that industry.  While we have 
played in the tide pools, away from the ocean sized breakers of Congressional 
and Federal controls, it has abundantly clear that what is going on is not 
sustainable, not good, not even faintly viable.   

I am not advocating a fantasy... I am advocating a restoration of the PROPER 
governance our constitution provided and served us so incredibly well while we 
stuck to it.  And, has done such immense damage when we ignored it. 

I am confused about why you think that WISPA and all other ISP organizations 
should not propose a clear philosophical message that FREE MARKETS WORK.  Duhh, 
we know they do, we compete as best we can, hobbled by the regulatory structure 
that grants others certain advantages, etc.  There's NOTHING wrong with the 
idea that Congress should set about undoing the sins of the last generations.  

Furthermore, as someone said, WISPA itself should, just because it is an 
advocacy organization, have a clear and unambiguous philosophy on what the 
organization is going to advocate for, not just WHO it advocates for - and I 
recall the heated discussions on that topic.  


++
Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
541-969-8200  509-386-4589
++





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Mark Nash]

You absolutely have a right to chase your dreams in this country, as 
opposed to other countries.  But you have to temper yourself with the 
absolute fact that you belong to a system.  Successful business owners 
either work within the system, or find a way around it.  Do what you 
can, when you can, to affect change, but to try to wholesale uproot the 
system is going to cause you persistent pain and anguish.


On 7/19/2011 8:15 AM, Andy Trimmell wrote:


+1

*From:*wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] 
*On Behalf Of *RickG

*Sent:* Saturday, July 16, 2011 9:04 PM
*To:* fai...@snappydsl.net; WISPA General List
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

"it is Regulation (1996 Telecom Act) that
allowed us (ISP's) to be able to go into the business of providing
internet access and other communication services"

*With all due respect, it's exactly the mindset that government 
"allows" us to be in business that IS the problem. Telecom Act or no, 
regulation or no, there should be no question that we are allowed to 
make a living the way we want to regardless.*


On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Faisal Imtiaz <mailto:fai...@snappydsl.net>> wrote:


I am going to address your points backwards:-

You wrote ---

And lastly, about the FCC, the last administration's appointees were
advocates for free markets and for competition and deregulation. Not
particularly effective ones, but at least they were not our enemy. The
current administration's people at the FCC are IN NO WAY our friend, for
any way, manner, or purpose, and everything they want is bad for us and
the country. STop talking political party talking points, and get some
reality.

-

We have been wireline ISP's first, since 2000, if you really believe
what you wrote (above) then you are truly mis-informed...
The simple facts are ... it is Regulation (1996 Telecom Act) that
allowed us (ISP's) to be able to go into the business of providing
internet access and other communication services . and it is THE
DEREGULATION over the past 5 years, that has been KILLING the ISP's  off.
You forget, that if you don't have the ability to connect to other
networks in a fair and equitable manner, you are not going to be able to
continue in this business.
Get a grip of reality and the full picture.. you are playing with a DUAL
EDGE sword here...

---You wrote-


You seem to think that the answer is to find the right pol to 
influence and

the right committee members to lobby and the right allies to obstruct X or
advance Y, but those are expediency, not principle.   They should be 
TACTICS

to a principled purpose, one that will attract others, on the basis of its
soundness and validity.


Not sure where you are coming up with this from ...however each and
every one has his own right to interpret the events .

You wrote -


Additionally, I said absolutely NOTHING partisan.   Not even ideological.
It's simple straightforward business principles.   Principle Numero Uno is
"have the freedom to be in business", and there is nothing convoluted or
difficult about that.


hehe.. when you start off a paragraph with "this administration"  or do
a follow up with "the previous administration".. that is as partisan as
one can get

I agree with your 'Principle Numero Uno', but you are harking at the
wrong organization.. it is not in  WISPA's charter or mission, maybe
should be a member of the SBA association, or FISPA or COMPTEL ... but
then again you will have to get your head straight about how the US Gov.
has operated for the last 200 years

WISPA's mission has been to address issues related to Wireless, (not
business, not telephone service, not hosted services, etc etc)...
While I understand your frustration with the Gov., and do agree with
some of your points, but what you keep putting forward on the WISPA
forums is  more like 'Don Quixote Tilting  at the windmills"



Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet&  Telecom

On 7/16/2011 12:59 AM, MDK wrote:
> A "plan of action"?  If I said "this is what WISPA should do" and 
laid it
> out in detail, all you'd do is say "who are you?  Why should we 
hacve to do

> what you say?"
>
> Frankly, I have no idea why you're having difficulty.  You see, when you
> have proper business principles as your guiding mechanism, what you 
should

> do is crystal clear.   Nobody needs to write out a plan of action, it
> becomes self evident - you always advocate FOR the proper and best 
thing.
> And, after being consistent, year after year, and when stuff like 
this comes
> up, which becom

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Mark Nash]

ensurate to your local city government suddenly deciding to
create a
>> "license to sell groceries"  and has structured it so that it
is all tied to
>> one auction, where any deep pockets bidder can remove the
ability of all the
>> incumbents to stay in business.   Instead of educating
Congress, the FCC
>> ,and our allies (if we have any) about how freedom to be in
business has
>> been the central mechanism by which a vast swath of America has
great
>> internet service,  we've quibbled over dollars and rules and
tried to slant
>> them for us against others - the very thinking we must now defeat.
>>
>> I have said we all stand on freedom, or fall together, and for
this I have
>> been branded as a radical, idiot, moron, right wing extremist,
and so on -
>> as such principles are, according to the self proclaimed 'wise
men' of the
>> group, outdated and unworkable.   Until we need them, of
course.  Even the
>> tortured and twisted explanation below is still trying to
defend the big
>> government crapola, and by now, it better be as clear and
obvious to you, as
>> a just hammered thumbnail, that NOTHING ELSE MATTERS IF WE DO
NOT HAVE THE
>> FREEDOM TO BE IN BUSINESS.
>>
>> I was at founding of WISPA.   I was there within a week or two
of the
>> interest list being formed, and I joined and donated money,
until previous
>> people of WISPA were found by me to be advocating FCC mandates
on us.   At
>> which I resigned and will not rejoin until my money is no
longer at risk of
>> being used against our basic and fundamental freedoms.
>>
>> YEARS have been sqandered, because WISPA failed to advocate for
freedom
>> first, a consistent, principled basis for everything said, advocacy
>> positions, etc.  Now, you have to suddenly "get religion", because
>> EVERYONE's freedom is at stake, even our competition's,.  
Rather than

>> advocate for that, WISPA now has a history just as compromised
as AT&T's and
>> every lobbyist's, because it stood for little more than trying
to bend the
>> rules to favor US instead of "THEM".   Expediently, we've
"discovered" that
>> open markets mean open to competition, as well, something not
advocated by
>> WISPA before.
>>
>> I said in 2009 that there were people headed for Congress, a
sea change
>> coming, and that WISPA needed to get politically allied with
the pro freedom
>> crowd.  They were called radicals and idiots on this list instead.
>>
>> If you have even ONCE advocated for big government
intervention...  For
>> money your way, for regulation to favor you instead of them,
for a chance to
>> get your hands on the subsidies, or IN ANY WAY supported the
notion of
>> government intervention in the markets YOU are directly to
blame for the
>> mess we're facing.   YOU failed to stand for the ONE thing that
matters,
>> freedom.   I sure hope we win this fight.
>>
>> When I started posting about defending your right to be in
business several
>> years ago, it was because I had envisioned this happening, it
was written on
>> the wall, in big letters.  I told you so.  Are you going to get
serious, or
>> this just going to be just more arguments of convenience?
>>
>>
>> ++
>> Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
>> 541-969-8200 509-386-4589 
>> ++
>>
>> --
>> From: "Forbes Mercy"mailto:forbes.me...@wabroadband.com>>
>> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 6:03 AM
>> To:mailto:memb...@wispa.org>>; "WISPA
General List"mailto:wireless@wispa.org>>
>> Subject: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire
>>
>>> TO WISP's
>>>
>>> I'm not much of an alarmist and I would never claim the sky is
falling
>>> unless I had positive proof.  Right now WISPA is faced with what I
>>> perceive as the most serious threat to our industry to date.
 Some of
>>> you may complain that the FCC is an overreaching intruder into our
>>> business.  While Federal Government oversight and regulations
into our
>>> rapidly growing industry may seem intrusiv

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Andy Trimmell]

+1

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of RickG
Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2011 9:04 PM
To: fai...@snappydsl.net; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

 

"it is Regulation (1996 Telecom Act) that
allowed us (ISP's) to be able to go into the business of providing
internet access and other communication services"

With all due respect, it's exactly the mindset that government "allows"
us to be in business that IS the problem. Telecom Act or no, regulation
or no, there should be no question that we are allowed to make a living
the way we want to regardless.

On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Faisal Imtiaz 
wrote:

I am going to address your points backwards:-

You wrote ---

And lastly, about the FCC, the last administration's appointees were
advocates for free markets and for competition and deregulation. Not
particularly effective ones, but at least they were not our enemy. The
current administration's people at the FCC are IN NO WAY our friend, for
any way, manner, or purpose, and everything they want is bad for us and
the country. STop talking political party talking points, and get some
reality.

-

We have been wireline ISP's first, since 2000, if you really believe
what you wrote (above) then you are truly mis-informed...
The simple facts are ... it is Regulation (1996 Telecom Act) that
allowed us (ISP's) to be able to go into the business of providing
internet access and other communication services . and it is THE
DEREGULATION over the past 5 years, that has been KILLING the ISP's
off.
You forget, that if you don't have the ability to connect to other
networks in a fair and equitable manner, you are not going to be able to
continue in this business.
Get a grip of reality and the full picture.. you are playing with a DUAL
EDGE sword here...

---You wrote-


You seem to think that the answer is to find the right pol to influence
and
the right committee members to lobby and the right allies to obstruct X
or
advance Y, but those are expediency, not principle.   They should be
TACTICS
to a principled purpose, one that will attract others, on the basis of
its
soundness and validity.


Not sure where you are coming up with this from ...however each and
every one has his own right to interpret the events .

You wrote -


Additionally, I said absolutely NOTHING partisan.   Not even
ideological.
It's simple straightforward business principles.   Principle Numero Uno
is
"have the freedom to be in business", and there is nothing convoluted or
difficult about that.


hehe.. when you start off a paragraph with "this administration"  or do
a follow up with "the previous administration".. that is as partisan as
one can get

I agree with your 'Principle Numero Uno', but you are harking at the
wrong organization.. it is not in  WISPA's charter or mission, maybe
should be a member of the SBA association, or FISPA or COMPTEL ... but
then again you will have to get your head straight about how the US Gov.
has operated for the last 200 years

WISPA's mission has been to address issues related to Wireless, (not
business, not telephone service, not hosted services, etc etc)...
While I understand your frustration with the Gov., and do agree with
some of your points, but what you keep putting forward on the WISPA
forums is  more like 'Don Quixote Tilting  at the windmills"



Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet&  Telecom



On 7/16/2011 12:59 AM, MDK wrote:
> A "plan of action"?  If I said "this is what WISPA should do" and laid
it
> out in detail, all you'd do is say "who are you?  Why should we hacve
to do
> what you say?"
>
> Frankly, I have no idea why you're having difficulty.  You see, when
you
> have proper business principles as your guiding mechanism, what you
should
> do is crystal clear.   Nobody needs to write out a plan of action, it
> becomes self evident - you always advocate FOR the proper and best
thing.
> And, after being consistent, year after year, and when stuff like this
comes
> up, which becomes so blatantly obviously a result of failure to follow
true
> principle, again, nothing is obscure or difficult.
>
> Additionally, I said absolutely NOTHING partisan.   Not even
ideological.
> It's simple straightforward business principles.   Principle Numero
Uno is
> "have the freedom to be in business", and there is nothing convoluted
or
> difficult about that.
>
> You seem to be interested in mere expediency.   That's what's gotten
us to
> this crisis point, the idea

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[RickG]

ere within a week or two of the
> >> interest list being formed, and I joined and donated money, until
> previous
> >> people of WISPA were found by me to be advocating FCC mandates on us.
> At
> >> which I resigned and will not rejoin until my money is no longer at risk
> of
> >> being used against our basic and fundamental freedoms.
> >>
> >> YEARS have been sqandered, because WISPA failed to advocate for freedom
> >> first, a consistent, principled basis for everything said, advocacy
> >> positions, etc.  Now, you have to suddenly "get religion", because
> >> EVERYONE's freedom is at stake, even our competition's,.   Rather than
> >> advocate for that, WISPA now has a history just as compromised as AT&T's
> and
> >> every lobbyist's, because it stood for little more than trying to bend
> the
> >> rules to favor US instead of "THEM".   Expediently, we've "discovered"
> that
> >> open markets mean open to competition, as well, something not advocated
> by
> >> WISPA before.
> >>
> >> I said in 2009 that there were people headed for Congress, a sea change
> >> coming, and that WISPA needed to get politically allied with the pro
> freedom
> >> crowd.  They were called radicals and idiots on this list instead.
> >>
> >> If you have even ONCE advocated for big government intervention...  For
> >> money your way, for regulation to favor you instead of them, for a
> chance to
> >> get your hands on the subsidies, or IN ANY WAY supported the notion of
> >> government intervention in the markets YOU are directly to blame for
> the
> >> mess we're facing.   YOU failed to stand for the ONE thing that matters,
> >> freedom.   I sure hope we win this fight.
> >>
> >> When I started posting about defending your right to be in business
> several
> >> years ago, it was because I had envisioned this happening, it was
> written on
> >> the wall, in big letters.  I told you so.  Are you going to get serious,
> or
> >> this just going to be just more arguments of convenience?
> >>
> >>
> >> ++
> >> Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
> >> 541-969-8200  509-386-4589
> >> ++
> >>
> >> --
> >> From: "Forbes Mercy"
> >> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 6:03 AM
> >> To:; "WISPA General List"
> >> Subject: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire
> >>
> >>> TO WISP's
> >>>
> >>> I'm not much of an alarmist and I would never claim the sky is falling
> >>> unless I had positive proof.  Right now WISPA is faced with what I
> >>> perceive as the most serious threat to our industry to date.  Some of
> >>> you may complain that the FCC is an overreaching intruder into our
> >>> business.  While Federal Government oversight and regulations into our
> >>> rapidly growing industry may seem intrusive WISPA has always had their
> >>> ear and we feel they listen and include us into much of their decision
> >>> making process.  There is no doubt they truly want nation-wide service
> >>> and recognize the lack of enthusiastic expansion by major players
> >>> (legacy carriers) into the rural area which is our strongest argument.
> >>>
> >>> Starting with Net Neutrality we noticed that Congress was starting to
> >>> politicize the work of the FCC.  Some of you thought that was a good
> >>> thing since you felt the FCC was slow in releasing frequencies.  The
> >>> micro-management of the FCC on that first issue has rapidly grown to
> >>> full fledged taking over of the FCC's mission.  Once the legacy
> >>> characters found that they could go around the FCC to Congress, where
> >>> they already give millions in "donations", they knew they had one big
> >>> leg up on small budget organizations like WISPA.  They are now flexing
> >>> their full lobbying muscle by getting some 'friends' in Congress to
> >>> introduce bills that would freeze any future expansion of the WISP
> >>> market locking us out of the lower frequencies that we need to
> penetrate
> >>> vegetation and terrain.  Much like teaching the Internet to your
> parents
> >>> other legislators look at the new laws with dazed amazement and just

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Scott Reed]

n -
>>> as such principles are, according to the self proclaimed 'wise men' of the
>>> group, outdated and unworkable.   Until we need them, of course.  Even the
>>> tortured and twisted explanation below is still trying to defend the big
>>> government crapola, and by now, it better be as clear and obvious to you, as
>>> a just hammered thumbnail, that NOTHING ELSE MATTERS IF WE DO NOT HAVE THE
>>> FREEDOM TO BE IN BUSINESS.
>>>
>>> I was at founding of WISPA.   I was there within a week or two of the
>>> interest list being formed, and I joined and donated money, until previous
>>> people of WISPA were found by me to be advocating FCC mandates on us.   At
>>> which I resigned and will not rejoin until my money is no longer at risk of
>>> being used against our basic and fundamental freedoms.
>>>
>>> YEARS have been sqandered, because WISPA failed to advocate for freedom
>>> first, a consistent, principled basis for everything said, advocacy
>>> positions, etc.  Now, you have to suddenly "get religion", because
>>> EVERYONE's freedom is at stake, even our competition's,.   Rather than
>>> advocate for that, WISPA now has a history just as compromised as AT&T's and
>>> every lobbyist's, because it stood for little more than trying to bend the
>>> rules to favor US instead of "THEM".   Expediently, we've "discovered" that
>>> open markets mean open to competition, as well, something not advocated by
>>> WISPA before.
>>>
>>> I said in 2009 that there were people headed for Congress, a sea change
>>> coming, and that WISPA needed to get politically allied with the pro freedom
>>> crowd.  They were called radicals and idiots on this list instead.
>>>
>>> If you have even ONCE advocated for big government intervention...  For
>>> money your way, for regulation to favor you instead of them, for a chance to
>>> get your hands on the subsidies, or IN ANY WAY supported the notion of
>>> government intervention in the markets YOU are directly to blame for the
>>> mess we're facing.   YOU failed to stand for the ONE thing that matters,
>>> freedom.   I sure hope we win this fight.
>>>
>>> When I started posting about defending your right to be in business several
>>> years ago, it was because I had envisioned this happening, it was written on
>>> the wall, in big letters.  I told you so.  Are you going to get serious, or
>>> this just going to be just more arguments of convenience?
>>>
>>>
>>> ++
>>> Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
>>> 541-969-8200  509-386-4589
>>> ++
>>>
>>> --
>>> From: "Forbes Mercy"
>>> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 6:03 AM
>>> To:; "WISPA General List"
>>> Subject: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire
>>>
>>>> TO WISP's
>>>>
>>>> I'm not much of an alarmist and I would never claim the sky is falling
>>>> unless I had positive proof.  Right now WISPA is faced with what I
>>>> perceive as the most serious threat to our industry to date.  Some of
>>>> you may complain that the FCC is an overreaching intruder into our
>>>> business.  While Federal Government oversight and regulations into our
>>>> rapidly growing industry may seem intrusive WISPA has always had their
>>>> ear and we feel they listen and include us into much of their decision
>>>> making process.  There is no doubt they truly want nation-wide service
>>>> and recognize the lack of enthusiastic expansion by major players
>>>> (legacy carriers) into the rural area which is our strongest argument.
>>>>
>>>> Starting with Net Neutrality we noticed that Congress was starting to
>>>> politicize the work of the FCC.  Some of you thought that was a good
>>>> thing since you felt the FCC was slow in releasing frequencies.  The
>>>> micro-management of the FCC on that first issue has rapidly grown to
>>>> full fledged taking over of the FCC's mission.  Once the legacy
>>>> characters found that they could go around the FCC to Congress, where
>>>> they already give millions in "donations", they knew they had one big
>>>> leg up on small budget organizations like WISPA.  They are now flexing
>>>> their 

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Mark Nash]

's freedom is at stake, even our competition's,.   Rather than
>> advocate for that, WISPA now has a history just as compromised as AT&T's and
>> every lobbyist's, because it stood for little more than trying to bend the
>> rules to favor US instead of "THEM".   Expediently, we've "discovered" that
>> open markets mean open to competition, as well, something not advocated by
>> WISPA before.
>>
>> I said in 2009 that there were people headed for Congress, a sea change
>> coming, and that WISPA needed to get politically allied with the pro freedom
>> crowd.  They were called radicals and idiots on this list instead.
>>
>> If you have even ONCE advocated for big government intervention...  For
>> money your way, for regulation to favor you instead of them, for a chance to
>> get your hands on the subsidies, or IN ANY WAY supported the notion of
>> government intervention in the markets YOU are directly to blame for the
>> mess we're facing.   YOU failed to stand for the ONE thing that matters,
>> freedom.   I sure hope we win this fight.
>>
>> When I started posting about defending your right to be in business several
>> years ago, it was because I had envisioned this happening, it was written on
>> the wall, in big letters.  I told you so.  Are you going to get serious, or
>> this just going to be just more arguments of convenience?
>>
>>
>> ++
>> Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
>> 541-969-8200  509-386-4589
>> ++
>>
>> --
>> From: "Forbes Mercy"
>> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 6:03 AM
>> To:; "WISPA General List"
>> Subject: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire
>>
>>> TO WISP's
>>>
>>> I'm not much of an alarmist and I would never claim the sky is falling
>>> unless I had positive proof.  Right now WISPA is faced with what I
>>> perceive as the most serious threat to our industry to date.  Some of
>>> you may complain that the FCC is an overreaching intruder into our
>>> business.  While Federal Government oversight and regulations into our
>>> rapidly growing industry may seem intrusive WISPA has always had their
>>> ear and we feel they listen and include us into much of their decision
>>> making process.  There is no doubt they truly want nation-wide service
>>> and recognize the lack of enthusiastic expansion by major players
>>> (legacy carriers) into the rural area which is our strongest argument.
>>>
>>> Starting with Net Neutrality we noticed that Congress was starting to
>>> politicize the work of the FCC.  Some of you thought that was a good
>>> thing since you felt the FCC was slow in releasing frequencies.  The
>>> micro-management of the FCC on that first issue has rapidly grown to
>>> full fledged taking over of the FCC's mission.  Once the legacy
>>> characters found that they could go around the FCC to Congress, where
>>> they already give millions in "donations", they knew they had one big
>>> leg up on small budget organizations like WISPA.  They are now flexing
>>> their full lobbying muscle by getting some 'friends' in Congress to
>>> introduce bills that would freeze any future expansion of the WISP
>>> market locking us out of the lower frequencies that we need to penetrate
>>> vegetation and terrain.  Much like teaching the Internet to your parents
>>> other legislators look at the new laws with dazed amazement and just say
>>> OK not realizing the ramifications and listening to the lobbyist spin.
>>>
>>> WISPA is not sitting back on this one, last year our board was not
>>> afraid to go far out of budget to get our feet firmly in the door on
>>> issues such as TV White Spaces (TV White Spaces) and the Universal
>>> Service Fund change to Connect America Fund (CAF).  It appears all that
>>> work is now under scrutiny by Congress and their answer seems to be one
>>> of 'lets just put all frequencies up for bid, licensed and unlicensed'.
>>> None of us WISP's could afford to bid against the likes of AT&T and
>>> Verizon and it has the potential of locking all small business out of
>>> any future frequencies.
>>>
>>> Yesterday the Legislative, FCC, and Promotions Committee of WISPA got
>>> together and released a letter to all Congressional Members of several
>>> committees relevant 

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[RickG]

"no body was scrambling to build private networks to connect to them"
But those were early days. If left alone, we may have had something more
advanced and even better. At the very least, we wouldn't be in the mess
we're in now. ;)

On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 4:57 PM, Faisal Imtiaz  wrote:

>  Yes may be true .. but I think it would be naive this think so..
> The evolution of the telecom and internet, I believe are inter-related,
> think of it this way.. if there was no internet, then why would folks need
> your wireless connection ?
> Least we forget before the internet, there were the BBS operators.. and a
> couple of very large ones.. CompuServe ? Prodigy ? IBM ? etc etc. those
> .no body was scrambling to build private networks to connect to them :)
>
> So my question to the wireless folks is .. if there was no Internet Boom,
> which had a significant relationship with the Telcom Boom.. where would you
> all be today ?
>
> The Wire line ISP's learned the hardway...that their ability to continue
> offering services was tied to 'Regulations'... and forces were already in
> play which the ISP's in general choose to ignore (it does not affect us..)
> and the outcome of those decision ended up being their demise.
>
> At the end of the day, we are all in the same boat.. (providing
> communication services) to our customers.. I believe it would be prudent to
> really think things thru before you / us / we / just take a blanket position
> on Regulation or DeRegulation.
>
> :)
>
> Faisal Imtiaz
> Snappy Internet & Telecom
> 7266 SW 48 Street
> Miami, Fl 33155
> Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232
>
> Helpdesk: 305 663 5518 option 2 Email: supp...@snappydsl.net
>
>
> On 7/17/2011 3:50 PM, RickG wrote:
>
> Bingo! It had nothing to do with the wireless business.
>
> On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 3:40 PM, Fred Goldstein wrote:
>
>> At 7/17/2011 01:44 PM, RickG wrote:
>> >So it wasnt "the 1996 Telecom Act that allowed us (ISP's) to be able
>> >to go into the business of providing
>> >internet access and other communication services"
>>
>>  It didn't allow entry into the internet business per se.
>>
>> It allowed entry into the DSL business.
>> It allowed entry into the local dial tone business.  This is worth
>> good money to some ISPs today, and it was necessary to prevent the
>> PSTN from melting down during the dial-up boom in 1997-2000.  The
>> Bell alternative was to price ISPs too high to create congestion.
>> It led to EELs, which allow some ISP-CLECs to reach non-local
>> commercial customers at much lower rates than Special Access.
>>
>>  --
>>  Fred Goldsteink1io   fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
>>  ionary Consulting  http://www.ionary.com/
>>  +1 617 795 2701 <%2B1%20617%20795%202701>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>  WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
>
>
> --
> -RickG
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



-- 
-RickG



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Faisal Imtiaz]

Yes may be true .. but I think it would be naive this think so..
The evolution of the telecom and internet, I believe are inter-related, 
think of it this way.. if there was no internet, then why would folks 
need your wireless connection ?
Least we forget before the internet, there were the BBS operators.. and 
a couple of very large ones.. CompuServe ? Prodigy ? IBM ? etc etc. 
those .no body was scrambling to build private networks to connect 
to them :)


So my question to the wireless folks is .. if there was no Internet 
Boom, which had a significant relationship with the Telcom Boom.. where 
would you all be today ?


The Wire line ISP's learned the hardway...that their ability to continue 
offering services was tied to 'Regulations'... and forces were already 
in play which the ISP's in general choose to ignore (it does not affect 
us..) and the outcome of those decision ended up being their demise.


At the end of the day, we are all in the same boat.. (providing 
communication services) to our customers.. I believe it would be prudent 
to really think things thru before you / us / we / just take a blanket 
position on Regulation or DeRegulation.


:)

Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet&  Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, Fl 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232
Helpdesk: 305 663 5518 option 2 Email: supp...@snappydsl.net


On 7/17/2011 3:50 PM, RickG wrote:

Bingo! It had nothing to do with the wireless business.

On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 3:40 PM, Fred Goldstein > wrote:


At 7/17/2011 01:44 PM, RickG wrote:
>So it wasnt "the 1996 Telecom Act that allowed us (ISP's) to be able
>to go into the business of providing
>internet access and other communication services"

It didn't allow entry into the internet business per se.

It allowed entry into the DSL business.
It allowed entry into the local dial tone business.  This is worth
good money to some ISPs today, and it was necessary to prevent the
PSTN from melting down during the dial-up boom in 1997-2000.  The
Bell alternative was to price ISPs too high to create congestion.
It led to EELs, which allow some ISP-CLECs to reach non-local
commercial customers at much lower rates than Special Access.

 --
 Fred Goldsteink1io   fgoldstein "at" ionary.com

 ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/
+1 617 795 2701 





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/



WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org 

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




--
-RickG




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Mike Hammett]

Well, it allows for VoIP, which we should all be doing to help our 
bottom lines.


it also helps many WISPs obtain their connection to the net, but they 
should be doing something Bell-less anyway.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



On 7/17/2011 2:50 PM, RickG wrote:

Bingo! It had nothing to do with the wireless business.

On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 3:40 PM, Fred Goldstein > wrote:


At 7/17/2011 01:44 PM, RickG wrote:
>So it wasnt "the 1996 Telecom Act that allowed us (ISP's) to be able
>to go into the business of providing
>internet access and other communication services"

It didn't allow entry into the internet business per se.

It allowed entry into the DSL business.
It allowed entry into the local dial tone business.  This is worth
good money to some ISPs today, and it was necessary to prevent the
PSTN from melting down during the dial-up boom in 1997-2000.  The
Bell alternative was to price ISPs too high to create congestion.
It led to EELs, which allow some ISP-CLECs to reach non-local
commercial customers at much lower rates than Special Access.

 --
 Fred Goldsteink1io   fgoldstein "at" ionary.com

 ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/
+1 617 795 2701 





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/



WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org 

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




--
-RickG





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[RickG]

Bingo! It had nothing to do with the wireless business.

On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 3:40 PM, Fred Goldstein wrote:

> At 7/17/2011 01:44 PM, RickG wrote:
> >So it wasnt "the 1996 Telecom Act that allowed us (ISP's) to be able
> >to go into the business of providing
> >internet access and other communication services"
>
> It didn't allow entry into the internet business per se.
>
> It allowed entry into the DSL business.
> It allowed entry into the local dial tone business.  This is worth
> good money to some ISPs today, and it was necessary to prevent the
> PSTN from melting down during the dial-up boom in 1997-2000.  The
> Bell alternative was to price ISPs too high to create congestion.
> It led to EELs, which allow some ISP-CLECs to reach non-local
> commercial customers at much lower rates than Special Access.
>
>  --
>  Fred Goldsteink1io   fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
>  ionary Consulting  http://www.ionary.com/
>  +1 617 795 2701
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



-- 
-RickG



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Fred Goldstein]

At 7/17/2011 01:44 PM, RickG wrote:
>So it wasnt "the 1996 Telecom Act that allowed us (ISP's) to be able 
>to go into the business of providing
>internet access and other communication services"

It didn't allow entry into the internet business per se.

It allowed entry into the DSL business.
It allowed entry into the local dial tone business.  This is worth 
good money to some ISPs today, and it was necessary to prevent the 
PSTN from melting down during the dial-up boom in 1997-2000.  The 
Bell alternative was to price ISPs too high to create congestion.
It led to EELs, which allow some ISP-CLECs to reach non-local 
commercial customers at much lower rates than Special Access.

  --
  Fred Goldsteink1io   fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
  ionary Consulting  http://www.ionary.com/
  +1 617 795 2701 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Mike Hammett]

 > way, manner, or purpose, and everything they want is bad
for us and the
> country.  STop talking political party talking points, and
        get some reality.

    >
>
>
> ++
> Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
> 541-969-8200  509-386-4589 
> ++
>
> --
> From: "Faisal Imtiaz"mailto:fai...@snappydsl.net>>
> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 8:01 PM

> To: "WISPA General List"mailto:wireless@wispa.org>>
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire
>
>> Errr...  and your point is ?
>>
>> Ok, I am a nobody... I have seen / read your emails, not
once can I say
>> I have been able to pick out a proposed specific, action
or a plan of
>> action from you 
>>
>> My friend you and I can agree or dis-agree on concepts all
day long...
>> but the point still remains ... I for myself still am not
able to
>> ascertain what exactly is it that you have been proposing
? ( I
>> understand the anger at all of the powers to be
part...and I beg to
>> differ when you start blaming ..'this administration'.
I personally
>> have been watching and following the FCC stuff, on sliding
slopes, for
>> the last 12 years..that according to my calculations has
been multiple
>> administrations.)
>>
>> You clear your head, and try to articulate your position in a
>> non-partisan manner, which can be understood by the
general public, and
>> put forward a reasonably understandable plan of action
 I guarantee
>> you, you will have many here who would be willing to
listen and follow
>> your lead...
>>
>> But if you continue expressing yourself in the convoluted
manner, as in
>> your email belowthen there is a very high probability
that these
>> will continue to be chalked off as "tirades" and "rants".
>>
>>
>> :)
>>
>> Faisal Imtiaz
>> Snappy Internet&  Telecom

>
>
>
>
>


> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>


>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
<mailto:wireless@wispa.org>
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/



WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
<mailto:wireless@wispa.org>

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




-- 
-RickG







WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/



WISPA Wireless List:wireless@wispa.org  <mailto:wireless@wispa.org>

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives:http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/



WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org <mailto:wireless@wispa.org>

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




--
-RickG





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Mike Hammett]

least they were not our
enemy.   The
> current administration's people at the FCC are IN NO WAY
our friend, for any
> way, manner, or purpose, and everything they want is bad
for us and the
> country.  STop talking political party talking points, and
        get some reality.

    >
>
>
> ++
> Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
> 541-969-8200  509-386-4589 
> ++
>
> --
> From: "Faisal Imtiaz"mailto:fai...@snappydsl.net>>
> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 8:01 PM

> To: "WISPA General List"mailto:wireless@wispa.org>>
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire
>
>> Errr...  and your point is ?
>>
>> Ok, I am a nobody... I have seen / read your emails, not
once can I say
>> I have been able to pick out a proposed specific, action
or a plan of
>> action from you 
>>
>> My friend you and I can agree or dis-agree on concepts all
day long...
>> but the point still remains ... I for myself still am not
able to
>> ascertain what exactly is it that you have been proposing
? ( I
>> understand the anger at all of the powers to be
part...and I beg to
>> differ when you start blaming ..'this administration'.
I personally
>> have been watching and following the FCC stuff, on sliding
slopes, for
>> the last 12 years..that according to my calculations has
been multiple
>> administrations.)
>>
>> You clear your head, and try to articulate your position in a
>> non-partisan manner, which can be understood by the
general public, and
>> put forward a reasonably understandable plan of action
 I guarantee
>> you, you will have many here who would be willing to
listen and follow
>> your lead...
>>
>> But if you continue expressing yourself in the convoluted
manner, as in
>> your email belowthen there is a very high probability
that these
>> will continue to be chalked off as "tirades" and "rants".
>>
>>
>> :)
>>
>> Faisal Imtiaz
>> Snappy Internet&  Telecom

>
>
>
>
>


> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>


>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
<mailto:wireless@wispa.org>
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/



WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
<mailto:wireless@wispa.org>

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




-- 
-RickG







WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/



WISPA Wireless List:wireless@wispa.org  <mailto:wireless@wispa.org>

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives:http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/



WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org <mailto:wireless@wispa.org>

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




--
-RickG





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Bruce Robertson]

 WISPA should
do" and laid it
> out in detail, all you'd do is say "who are you?  Why
should we hacve to do
> what you say?"
>
> Frankly, I have no idea why you're having difficulty.  You
see, when you
> have proper business principles as your guiding mechanism,
what you should
> do is crystal clear.   Nobody needs to write out a plan of
action, it
> becomes self evident - you always advocate FOR the proper
and best thing.
> And, after being consistent, year after year, and when
stuff like this comes
> up, which becomes so blatantly obviously a result of
failure to follow true
> principle, again, nothing is obscure or difficult.
>
> Additionally, I said absolutely NOTHING partisan.   Not
even ideological.
> It's simple straightforward business principles.  
Principle Numero Uno is

> "have the freedom to be in business", and there is nothing
convoluted or
> difficult about that.
>
> You seem to be interested in mere expediency.   That's
what's gotten us to
> this crisis point, the idea of managing the favoritism, the
cronyism, etc,
> to favor you, or at least not hurt you too much.   That's
what's BEEN going
> on.  Had we (WISPA) been looking for and actively seeking
allies who would
> with us, say with many voices, but one message - "hands
off, and be a
> steward of what's entrusted to you", I think the landscape
would look
> different.  The word "steward" is loaded.  It means one
entrusted to manage
> things for the benefit OF THE OWNER, that's us.The FCC
and Congress are
> managing for the benefit of the federal treasury and the
donations to
> campaigns - which is the polar opposite of managed for the
good of the
> people.
>
> In the previous post, I wrote an analogy, one where the
city effectively
> puts every service and business up for licensure at
auction.  It takes no
> imagination at all to see that the city coffers and the
winning bidder are
> the beneficiaries and the people are the losers.   Spectrum
is a public or
> national resource held in trust by the federal government.
  Auctions to the
> highest bidder do not benefit anyone but the monopoly
holder and the
> treasury, by creating monopolies or very limited
competition.   Again, we as
> consumers and businessmen are the losers.  Imagine if there
were enough
> spectrum delegated so that if us WISP's wanted to be mobile
broadband
> providers we could, as well as cellular, or even video /
audio broadcasters.
> Instead, such services have been delegated a minute slice
of available
> spectrum, keeping up the price of the auctions - and the
number of
> competitors down.
>
> Why?   It is in the interest of politicians to separate us
from our money.
> But their REAL job is to defend us keeping it.  There are
NOW myriad
> political allies to spread this message, to change the
discussion from "whom
> to screw out of lots of money" to "what is the best policy
for the people
> and keep competition alive?"   And, that's the message that
is NOT being
> advocated by WISPA, and it should be.
>
> You seem to think that the answer is to find the right pol
to influence and
> the right committee members to lobby and the right allies
to obstruct X or
> advance Y, but those are expediency, not principle.   They
should be TACTICS
> to a principled purpose, one that will attract others, on
the basis of its
> soundness and validity.
>
> And lastly, about the FCC, the last administration's
appointees were
> advocates for free markets and for competition and
deregulation.  Not
> particularly effective ones, but at least they were not our
enemy.   The
> current administration's people at the FCC are IN NO WAY
our friend, for any
> way, manner, or purpose, and everything they want is bad
for us and the
> country.  STop talking political party talking points, and
    get some reality.

   

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[RickG]

> >
>> > Frankly, I have no idea why you're having difficulty.  You see, when you
>> > have proper business principles as your guiding mechanism, what you
>> should
>> > do is crystal clear.   Nobody needs to write out a plan of action, it
>> > becomes self evident - you always advocate FOR the proper and best
>> thing.
>> > And, after being consistent, year after year, and when stuff like this
>> comes
>> > up, which becomes so blatantly obviously a result of failure to follow
>> true
>> > principle, again, nothing is obscure or difficult.
>> >
>> > Additionally, I said absolutely NOTHING partisan.   Not even
>> ideological.
>> > It's simple straightforward business principles.   Principle Numero Uno
>> is
>> > "have the freedom to be in business", and there is nothing convoluted or
>> > difficult about that.
>> >
>> > You seem to be interested in mere expediency.   That's what's gotten us
>> to
>> > this crisis point, the idea of managing the favoritism, the cronyism,
>> etc,
>> > to favor you, or at least not hurt you too much.   That's what's BEEN
>> going
>> > on.  Had we (WISPA) been looking for and actively seeking allies who
>> would
>> > with us, say with many voices, but one message - "hands off, and be a
>> > steward of what's entrusted to you", I think the landscape would look
>> > different.  The word "steward" is loaded.  It means one entrusted to
>> manage
>> > things for the benefit OF THE OWNER, that's us.The FCC and Congress
>> are
>> > managing for the benefit of the federal treasury and the donations to
>> > campaigns - which is the polar opposite of managed for the good of the
>> > people.
>> >
>> > In the previous post, I wrote an analogy, one where the city effectively
>> > puts every service and business up for licensure at auction.  It takes
>> no
>> > imagination at all to see that the city coffers and the winning bidder
>> are
>> > the beneficiaries and the people are the losers.   Spectrum is a public
>> or
>> > national resource held in trust by the federal government.   Auctions to
>> the
>> > highest bidder do not benefit anyone but the monopoly holder and the
>> > treasury, by creating monopolies or very limited competition.   Again,
>> we as
>> > consumers and businessmen are the losers.  Imagine if there were enough
>> > spectrum delegated so that if us WISP's wanted to be mobile broadband
>> > providers we could, as well as cellular, or even video / audio
>> broadcasters.
>> > Instead, such services have been delegated a minute slice of available
>> > spectrum, keeping up the price of the auctions - and the number of
>> > competitors down.
>> >
>> > Why?   It is in the interest of politicians to separate us from our
>> money.
>> > But their REAL job is to defend us keeping it.  There are NOW myriad
>> > political allies to spread this message, to change the discussion from
>> "whom
>> > to screw out of lots of money" to "what is the best policy for the
>> people
>> > and keep competition alive?"   And, that's the message that is NOT being
>> > advocated by WISPA, and it should be.
>> >
>> > You seem to think that the answer is to find the right pol to influence
>> and
>> > the right committee members to lobby and the right allies to obstruct X
>> or
>> > advance Y, but those are expediency, not principle.   They should be
>> TACTICS
>> > to a principled purpose, one that will attract others, on the basis of
>> its
>> > soundness and validity.
>> >
>> > And lastly, about the FCC, the last administration's appointees were
>> > advocates for free markets and for competition and deregulation.  Not
>> > particularly effective ones, but at least they were not our enemy.   The
>> > current administration's people at the FCC are IN NO WAY our friend, for
>> any
>> > way, manner, or purpose, and everything they want is bad for us and the
>> > country.  STop talking political party talking points, and get some
>> reality.
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ++
>> > Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
>> > 541-969-8200  509-386-4589
>> > ++
>> >
>> > 

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Mike Hammett]

Thanks for the history lesson, Fred!  I'm glad I pointed you this way 
from the replacement ISP-CLEC.


These regulations certainly spurred the ecosystems that enable us to 
deploy cost effectively today.


I've never been a fan of using someone else's network without a 
long-term agreement (IRU, for example).


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



On 7/17/2011 9:35 AM, Fred Goldstein wrote:

At 7/17/2011 08:30 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
No policy that I'm aware of prevented anyone from being an ISP.  It 
was a cost issue.


Before 1996, there was open entry into the ISP market under Computer 
II/III, but that was largely limited to dial-up, leased lines, and 
telco transport services (such as Frame Relay).  A handful of 
competitive access providers (CAPs, like MFS, Teleport and Brooks) had 
set up shop before TA96, based on a 1985 FCC ruling (among  other 
thing, asserting interstate jurisdiction over fiber optics used to 
carry interstate or mixed-jurisdiction traffic, and thus pre-empting 
state barriers to entry), but only served a relatively few buildings, 
and were with narrow exceptions very unprofitable.


TA96 did not create ISPs; it created CLECs, who in turn made life much 
easier for ISPs.  (Before TA96, a few states had authorized CLECs on 
their own, often on rather limited terms, but TA96 made it a 
requirement.)  It was certainly aimed at opening up markets and 
weakening ILEC monopoly power.  In 1996, the dial-up ISP boom was 
creating congestion on the ILEC networks, and their three-year 
expansion cycle couldn't cope with it.  So they were again petitioning 
the FCC to impose switched access charges on calls to enhanced service 
providers, a/k/a "the Modem Tax".  CLECs rode to the rescue by adding 
inbound dial capacity in a hurry.


Wireless ISPs were theoretically authorized earlier, by relaxed rules 
for 2.4 GHz and 900 MHz unlicensed operation, but the technology was 
not ready for volume deployment until after the turn of the century.


The DC Circuit Court of Appeals remanded some FCC pro-competition 
rules (even after the Supreme Court had approved the most contentious) 
and the post-2001 FCC used that as an excuse to roll back open 
competition.  This mostly hinged on the so-called "necessary" and 
"impair" clauses of TA96.  But I have some recent correspondence from 
the former Senate staff member who helped draft that language, and he 
points out that the current interpretation is far from what was 
intended and far from what it literally says in black letter law. (The 
stricter "necessary" part was only intended to cover intellectual 
property issues in the use of ILEC operational support software, not 
all UNEs.)


FCC policy this past decade was very literally a War on ISPs, with 
CLECs not the direct target so much as an ally of the true enemy, 
ISPs.  The FCC changed the reciprocal compensation rate on ISP-bound 
calls.  It took away DSL line sharing.  It took away ISP wholesale 
access to ILEC fiber networks such as FiOS and uVerse (hence open 
Pronto became closed uVerse).  And it revoked the Computer II rules 
that allowed ISPs on ILEC facilities at all.  WISPs are less impacted, 
of course, than urban wireline ISPs, who are now largely closed off 
from mass markets.


 --
 Fred Goldsteink1io   fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
 ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/
 +1 617 795 2701





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Fred Goldstein]

At 7/17/2011 08:30 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
No policy that I'm aware of prevented anyone from being an ISP.  It 
was a cost issue.


Before 1996, there was open entry into the ISP market under Computer 
II/III, but that was largely limited to dial-up, leased lines, and 
telco transport services (such as Frame Relay).  A handful of 
competitive access providers (CAPs, like MFS, Teleport and Brooks) 
had set up shop before TA96, based on a 1985 FCC ruling (among  other 
thing, asserting interstate jurisdiction over fiber optics used to 
carry interstate or mixed-jurisdiction traffic, and thus pre-empting 
state barriers to entry), but only served a relatively few buildings, 
and were with narrow exceptions very unprofitable.


TA96 did not create ISPs; it created CLECs, who in turn made life 
much easier for ISPs.  (Before TA96, a few states had authorized 
CLECs on their own, often on rather limited terms, but TA96 made it a 
requirement.)  It was certainly aimed at opening up markets and 
weakening ILEC monopoly power.  In 1996, the dial-up ISP boom was 
creating congestion on the ILEC networks, and their three-year 
expansion cycle couldn't cope with it.  So they were again 
petitioning the FCC to impose switched access charges on calls to 
enhanced service providers, a/k/a "the Modem Tax".  CLECs rode to the 
rescue by adding inbound dial capacity in a hurry.


Wireless ISPs were theoretically authorized earlier, by relaxed rules 
for 2.4 GHz and 900 MHz unlicensed operation, but the technology was 
not ready for volume deployment until after the turn of the century.


The DC Circuit Court of Appeals remanded some FCC pro-competition 
rules (even after the Supreme Court had approved the most 
contentious) and the post-2001 FCC used that as an excuse to roll 
back open competition.  This mostly hinged on the so-called 
"necessary" and "impair" clauses of TA96.  But I have some recent 
correspondence from the former Senate staff member who helped draft 
that language, and he points out that the current interpretation is 
far from what was intended and far from what it literally says in 
black letter law. (The stricter "necessary" part was only intended to 
cover intellectual property issues in the use of ILEC operational 
support software, not all UNEs.)


FCC policy this past decade was very literally a War on ISPs, with 
CLECs not the direct target so much as an ally of the true enemy, 
ISPs.  The FCC changed the reciprocal compensation rate on ISP-bound 
calls.  It took away DSL line sharing.  It took away ISP wholesale 
access to ILEC fiber networks such as FiOS and uVerse (hence open 
Pronto became closed uVerse).  And it revoked the Computer II rules 
that allowed ISPs on ILEC facilities at all.  WISPs are less 
impacted, of course, than urban wireline ISPs, who are now largely 
closed off from mass markets.


 --
 Fred Goldsteink1io   fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
 ionary Consulting  http://www.ionary.com/
 +1 617 795 2701 


WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Mike Hammett]

rincipled purpose, one that will attract others, on the
basis of its
> soundness and validity.
>
> And lastly, about the FCC, the last administration's
appointees were
> advocates for free markets and for competition and
deregulation.  Not
> particularly effective ones, but at least they were not our
enemy.   The
> current administration's people at the FCC are IN NO WAY our
friend, for any
> way, manner, or purpose, and everything they want is bad for
us and the
> country.  STop talking political party talking points, and
get some reality.
>
>
>
> ++
> Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
> 541-969-8200 509-386-4589 
> ++
>
> --
> From: "Faisal Imtiaz"mailto:fai...@snappydsl.net>>
> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 8:01 PM
> To: "WISPA General List"mailto:wireless@wispa.org>>
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire
>
>> Errr...  and your point is ?
>>
>> Ok, I am a nobody... I have seen / read your emails, not
once can I say
>> I have been able to pick out a proposed specific, action or
a plan of
>> action from you 
>>
>> My friend you and I can agree or dis-agree on concepts all
day long...
>> but the point still remains ... I for myself still am not
able to
>> ascertain what exactly is it that you have been proposing ? ( I
>> understand the anger at all of the powers to be
part...and I beg to
>> differ when you start blaming ..'this administration'. I
personally
>> have been watching and following the FCC stuff, on sliding
slopes, for
>> the last 12 years..that according to my calculations has
been multiple
>> administrations.)
>>
>> You clear your head, and try to articulate your position in a
>> non-partisan manner, which can be understood by the general
public, and
>> put forward a reasonably understandable plan of action 
I guarantee
>> you, you will have many here who would be willing to listen
and follow
>> your lead..
>>
>> But if you continue expressing yourself in the convoluted
manner, as in
>> your email belowthen there is a very high probability
that these
>> will continue to be chalked off as "tirades" and "rants".
>>
>>
>> :)
>>
>> Faisal Imtiaz
>> Snappy Internet&  Telecom
>
>
>
>
>


> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>


>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
<mailto:wireless@wispa.org>
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/



WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org <mailto:wireless@wispa.org>

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




--
-RickG






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


WISPA Wireless List:wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives:http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


WISPA Wireless List:wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives:http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Faisal Imtiaz]

st 200 years

WISPA's mission has been to address issues related to Wireless, (not
business, not telephone service, not hosted services, etc etc)...
While I understand your frustration with the Gov., and do agree with
some of your points, but what you keep putting forward on the WISPA
forums is  more like 'Don Quixote Tilting  at the windmills"


Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet&  Telecom


On 7/16/2011 12:59 AM, MDK wrote:
> A "plan of action"?  If I said "this is what WISPA should do"
and laid it
> out in detail, all you'd do is say "who are you?  Why should
we hacve to do
> what you say?"
>
> Frankly, I have no idea why you're having difficulty.  You
see, when you
> have proper business principles as your guiding mechanism,
what you should
> do is crystal clear.   Nobody needs to write out a plan of
action, it
> becomes self evident - you always advocate FOR the proper and
best thing.
> And, after being consistent, year after year, and when stuff
like this comes
> up, which becomes so blatantly obviously a result of failure
to follow true
> principle, again, nothing is obscure or difficult.
>
> Additionally, I said absolutely NOTHING partisan.   Not even
ideological.
> It's simple straightforward business principles.   Principle
Numero Uno is
> "have the freedom to be in business", and there is nothing
convoluted or
> difficult about that.
>
> You seem to be interested in mere expediency.   That's what's
gotten us to
> this crisis point, the idea of managing the favoritism, the
cronyism, etc,
> to favor you, or at least not hurt you too much.   That's
what's BEEN going
> on.  Had we (WISPA) been looking for and actively seeking
allies who would
> with us, say with many voices, but one message - "hands off,
and be a
> steward of what's entrusted to you", I think the landscape
would look
> different.  The word "steward" is loaded.  It means one
entrusted to manage
> things for the benefit OF THE OWNER, that's us.The FCC and
Congress are
> managing for the benefit of the federal treasury and the
donations to
> campaigns - which is the polar opposite of managed for the
good of the
> people.
>
> In the previous post, I wrote an analogy, one where the city
effectively
> puts every service and business up for licensure at auction.
 It takes no
> imagination at all to see that the city coffers and the
winning bidder are
> the beneficiaries and the people are the losers.   Spectrum is
a public or
> national resource held in trust by the federal government.  
Auctions to the

> highest bidder do not benefit anyone but the monopoly holder
and the
> treasury, by creating monopolies or very limited competition.
  Again, we as
> consumers and businessmen are the losers.  Imagine if there
were enough
> spectrum delegated so that if us WISP's wanted to be mobile
broadband
> providers we could, as well as cellular, or even video / audio
broadcasters.
> Instead, such services have been delegated a minute slice of
available
> spectrum, keeping up the price of the auctions - and the number of
> competitors down.
>
> Why?   It is in the interest of politicians to separate us
from our money.
> But their REAL job is to defend us keeping it.  There are NOW
myriad
> political allies to spread this message, to change the
discussion from "whom
> to screw out of lots of money" to "what is the best policy for
the people
> and keep competition alive?"   And, that's the message that is
NOT being
> advocated by WISPA, and it should be.
>
> You seem to think that the answer is to find the right pol to
influence and
> the right committee members to lobby and the right allies to
obstruct X or
> advance Y, but those are expediency, not principle.   They
should be TACTICS
> to a principled purpose, one that will attract others, on the
basis of its
> soundness and validity.
>
> And lastly, about the FCC, the last administration's
appointees were
> advocates for free markets and for competition and
deregulation.  Not
> particularly effective ones, but at least they were not our
enemy.   The
> current administration's people at the FCC are IN NO WAY our
friend, for any
> way, manner, or purpose, and everything they want is bad for
us and the
> country

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Fred Goldstein]

At 7/17/2011 07:22 AM, Scott Reed wrote:

Well, yeah, necessarily.  Where I lived the service got worse.


I presume you mean that ironically, as a sample of one does not 
indicate a general case.


Service got considerably better for my employer at the time, where I 
worked in telecommunications.  Competition helps.  And for the first 
couple of years, the still-fettered Bells tried pretty hard to do a 
good job with the businesses they were given.



On 7/16/2011 10:08 PM, Fred Goldstein wrote:

At 7/16/2011 09:41 PM, Scott Reed wrote:
I also noticed that the breakup of Ma Bell degraded service in 
many areas.  A monopoly by market demand is not necessarily 
bad.  A monopoly by regulation is bad.


Well, not necessarily.  Ma Bell's service was never consistent 
before the breakup, but their P.R. was good.


The monopoly occurred "naturally" from the time the Bell patents 
expired (1893) until the last competitors were gone in the 
1930s.  There were CLECs galore (called "independents" at the time, 
but not the geographic-monopoly independents of later years) in the 
1893-1920 era.  Bell bought Pupin's patent on the loading coil in 
the 1890s, which gave them a monopoly on long distance (>10 miles 
or so), but local service was competitive in many 
places.  Independents pioneered dial; Bell was all-manual until the 
1920s.  However, the economics of natural monopoly are real.  The 
larger market share means a lower unit cost, so the big guy almost 
always wins.  So by 1934, when the Communications Act was passed, 
the monopoly already existed; FCC and state rules simply locked it 
in place (made it de jure).


The idea of TA96 was to de-monopolize.  Since the natural monopoly 
still exists, unbundling is a way to open the market, but the 2001 
FCC turned against it and the current one remains opposed, law notwithstanding.


The public Internet only exists because the FCC in 1966 started the 
Computer Inquiries, which created a bright line distinction between 
carriage ("basic service") and content ("enhanced service"), 
especially in 1980's Computer II. The ILECs hated that.  The FCC 
also rammed sharing and resale down their throats around 1976 -- 
before that, you couldn't lease a line between two companies unless 
one of them was a licensed common carrier (e.g., Western Union, one 
of Ma Bell's few authorized wholesale resellers).  How could you 
have an ISP without those rules?  However, in 2005 the FCC revoked 
the Computer Inquiry rules, in response to a Verizon request, which 
is what led to the whole Network Neutrality kerfuffle.


The "no regulation" approach would most likely involve granting 
ILECs full property rights on their networks, so they would have 
unregulated monopolies. Who does that benefit?  It's a banana 
republic situation.  Every civilized country regulates its 
monopolies or keeps them under public ownership.  Of course 
property rights are themselves an artificial legal construct, so I 
suppose a Somali-level approach would be that you could string 
wires, but you'd need to hire warlords to guard them, and could 
steal whatever your warlords were able to rassle from 
competitors.  Ironically, Somalia does have a competitive mobile 
phone sector, since there is no government to regulate it and the 
warlord armies do guard their towers, but no wireline sector to speak of.


WISPs are less dependent on wireline rules than wireline ISPs, who 
are largely hurting due to malevolent FCC policies.  But they still 
depend on spectrum regulatory policies. which the FCC makes 
consistent with the law.  And many depend on wireline backhaul, 
where regulation is the only thing that keeps the monopolies from 
gouging worse than they do.  (I've got an article in the works 
about how the real digital divide is the way the ILECs have kept 
the fiber dividend -- the low per-bit cost of capacity on fiber -- 
away from their monopoly ratepayers, even though it operates in 
competitive markets.



On 7/16/2011 9:25 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
Well...again you have to go further back in history...before 
telecom regulation ..it was a Ma Bell monopoly ..and without 
regulation...there is a very good chance that it will again 
become a Ma Bell monopoly or maybe a duopoly...


Let's not forget that...

Faisal

On Jul 16, 2011, at 9:03 PM, RickG 
<rgunder...@gmail.com> wrote:



"it is Regulation (1996 Telecom Act) that
allowed us (ISP's) to be able to go into the business of providing
internet access and other communication services"

With all due respect, it's exactly the mindset that government 
"allows" us to be in business that IS the problem. Telecom Act 
or no, regulation or no, there should be no question that we are 
allowed to make a living the way we want to regardless.


 --
 Fred Goldsteink1io   fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
 ionary Consulting  http://www.ionary.com/
 +1 617 795 2701 

---

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Mike Hammett]

crystal clear.   Nobody needs to write out a plan of
action, it
> becomes self evident - you always advocate FOR the proper and
best thing.
> And, after being consistent, year after year, and when stuff
like this comes
> up, which becomes so blatantly obviously a result of failure to
follow true
> principle, again, nothing is obscure or difficult.
>
> Additionally, I said absolutely NOTHING partisan.   Not even
ideological.
> It's simple straightforward business principles.   Principle
Numero Uno is
> "have the freedom to be in business", and there is nothing
convoluted or
> difficult about that.
>
> You seem to be interested in mere expediency.   That's what's
gotten us to
> this crisis point, the idea of managing the favoritism, the
cronyism, etc,
> to favor you, or at least not hurt you too much.   That's
what's BEEN going
> on.  Had we (WISPA) been looking for and actively seeking
allies who would
> with us, say with many voices, but one message - "hands off,
and be a
> steward of what's entrusted to you", I think the landscape
would look
> different.  The word "steward" is loaded.  It means one
entrusted to manage
> things for the benefit OF THE OWNER, that's us.The FCC and
Congress are
> managing for the benefit of the federal treasury and the
donations to
> campaigns - which is the polar opposite of managed for the good
of the
> people.
>
> In the previous post, I wrote an analogy, one where the city
effectively
> puts every service and business up for licensure at auction.
 It takes no
> imagination at all to see that the city coffers and the winning
bidder are
> the beneficiaries and the people are the losers.   Spectrum is
a public or
> national resource held in trust by the federal government.  
Auctions to the

> highest bidder do not benefit anyone but the monopoly holder
and the
> treasury, by creating monopolies or very limited competition.  
Again, we as

> consumers and businessmen are the losers.  Imagine if there
were enough
> spectrum delegated so that if us WISP's wanted to be mobile
broadband
> providers we could, as well as cellular, or even video / audio
broadcasters.
> Instead, such services have been delegated a minute slice of
available
> spectrum, keeping up the price of the auctions - and the number of
> competitors down.
>
> Why?   It is in the interest of politicians to separate us from
our money.
> But their REAL job is to defend us keeping it.  There are NOW
myriad
> political allies to spread this message, to change the
discussion from "whom
> to screw out of lots of money" to "what is the best policy for
the people
> and keep competition alive?"   And, that's the message that is
NOT being
> advocated by WISPA, and it should be.
>
> You seem to think that the answer is to find the right pol to
influence and
> the right committee members to lobby and the right allies to
obstruct X or
> advance Y, but those are expediency, not principle.   They
should be TACTICS
> to a principled purpose, one that will attract others, on the
basis of its
> soundness and validity.
>
> And lastly, about the FCC, the last administration's appointees
were
> advocates for free markets and for competition and
deregulation.  Not
> particularly effective ones, but at least they were not our
enemy.   The
> current administration's people at the FCC are IN NO WAY our
friend, for any
> way, manner, or purpose, and everything they want is bad for us
and the
> country.  STop talking political party talking points, and get
some reality.
>
>
>
> ++
> Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
> 541-969-8200 509-386-4589 
> ++
>
> --
> From: "Faisal Imtiaz"mailto:fai...@snappydsl.net>>
> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 8:01 PM
> To: "WISPA General List"mailto:wireless@wispa.org>>
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire
>
>> Errr...  and your point is ?
>>
>> Ok, I am a nobody... I have seen / read your emails, not once
can I say
>> I have been able to pick out a proposed specific, action or a
plan of
>> action from you 
>>
>> My friend you an

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Mike Hammett]

 partisan.   Not even
ideological.
> It's simple straightforward business principles.   Principle
Numero Uno is
> "have the freedom to be in business", and there is nothing
convoluted or
> difficult about that.
>
> You seem to be interested in mere expediency.   That's what's
gotten us to
> this crisis point, the idea of managing the favoritism, the
cronyism, etc,
> to favor you, or at least not hurt you too much.   That's what's
BEEN going
> on.  Had we (WISPA) been looking for and actively seeking allies
who would
> with us, say with many voices, but one message - "hands off, and
be a
> steward of what's entrusted to you", I think the landscape would
look
> different.  The word "steward" is loaded.  It means one
entrusted to manage
> things for the benefit OF THE OWNER, that's us.The FCC and
Congress are
> managing for the benefit of the federal treasury and the
donations to
> campaigns - which is the polar opposite of managed for the good
of the
> people.
>
> In the previous post, I wrote an analogy, one where the city
effectively
> puts every service and business up for licensure at auction.  It
takes no
> imagination at all to see that the city coffers and the winning
bidder are
> the beneficiaries and the people are the losers.   Spectrum is a
public or
> national resource held in trust by the federal government.  
Auctions to the

> highest bidder do not benefit anyone but the monopoly holder and the
> treasury, by creating monopolies or very limited competition.  
Again, we as

> consumers and businessmen are the losers.  Imagine if there were
enough
> spectrum delegated so that if us WISP's wanted to be mobile
broadband
> providers we could, as well as cellular, or even video / audio
broadcasters.
> Instead, such services have been delegated a minute slice of
available
> spectrum, keeping up the price of the auctions - and the number of
> competitors down.
>
> Why?   It is in the interest of politicians to separate us from
our money.
> But their REAL job is to defend us keeping it.  There are NOW myriad
> political allies to spread this message, to change the
discussion from "whom
> to screw out of lots of money" to "what is the best policy for
the people
> and keep competition alive?"   And, that's the message that is
NOT being
> advocated by WISPA, and it should be.
>
> You seem to think that the answer is to find the right pol to
influence and
> the right committee members to lobby and the right allies to
obstruct X or
> advance Y, but those are expediency, not principle.   They
should be TACTICS
> to a principled purpose, one that will attract others, on the
basis of its
> soundness and validity.
>
> And lastly, about the FCC, the last administration's appointees were
> advocates for free markets and for competition and deregulation.
 Not
> particularly effective ones, but at least they were not our
enemy.   The
> current administration's people at the FCC are IN NO WAY our
friend, for any
> way, manner, or purpose, and everything they want is bad for us
and the
> country.  STop talking political party talking points, and get
some reality.
>
>
>
> ++
> Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
> 541-969-8200 509-386-4589 
> ++
>
> --
> From: "Faisal Imtiaz"mailto:fai...@snappydsl.net>>
> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 8:01 PM
> To: "WISPA General List"mailto:wireless@wispa.org>>
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire
>
>> Errr...  and your point is ?
>>
>> Ok, I am a nobody... I have seen / read your emails, not once
can I say
>> I have been able to pick out a proposed specific, action or a
plan of
>> action from you 
>>
>> My friend you and I can agree or dis-agree on concepts all day
long...
>> but the point still remains ... I for myself still am not able to
>> ascertain what exactly is it that you have been proposing ? ( I
>> understand the anger at all of the powers to be part...and
I beg to
>> differ when you start blaming ..'this administration'. I
personally
>> have been watching and following the FCC s

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Scott Reed]

Well, yeah, necessarily.  Where I lived the service got worse.

On 7/16/2011 10:08 PM, Fred Goldstein wrote:

At 7/16/2011 09:41 PM, Scott Reed wrote:
I also noticed that the breakup of Ma Bell degraded service in many 
areas.  A monopoly by market demand is not necessarily bad.  A 
monopoly by regulation is bad.


Well, not necessarily.  Ma Bell's service was never consistent before 
the breakup, but their P.R. was good.


The monopoly occurred "naturally" from the time the Bell patents 
expired (1893) until the last competitors were gone in the 1930s.  
There were CLECs galore (called "independents" at the time, but not 
the geographic-monopoly independents of later years) in the 1893-1920 
era.  Bell bought Pupin's patent on the loading coil in the 1890s, 
which gave them a monopoly on long distance (>10 miles or so), but 
local service was competitive in many places.  Independents pioneered 
dial; Bell was all-manual until the 1920s.  However, the economics of 
natural monopoly are real.  The larger market share means a lower unit 
cost, so the big guy almost always wins.  So by 1934, when the 
Communications Act was passed, the monopoly already existed; FCC and 
state rules simply locked it in place (made it de jure).


The idea of TA96 was to de-monopolize.  Since the natural monopoly 
still exists, unbundling is a way to open the market, but the 2001 FCC 
turned against it and the current one remains opposed, law 
notwithstanding.


The public Internet only exists because the FCC in 1966 started the 
Computer Inquiries, which created a bright line distinction between 
carriage ("basic service") and content ("enhanced service"), 
especially in 1980's Computer II. The ILECs hated that.  The FCC also 
rammed sharing and resale down their throats around 1976 -- before 
that, you couldn't lease a line between two companies unless one of 
them was a licensed common carrier (e.g., Western Union, one of Ma 
Bell's few authorized wholesale resellers).  How could you have an ISP 
without those rules?  However, in 2005 the FCC revoked the Computer 
Inquiry rules, in response to a Verizon request, which is what led to 
the whole Network Neutrality kerfuffle.


The "no regulation" approach would most likely involve granting ILECs 
full property rights on their networks, so they would have unregulated 
monopolies. Who does that benefit?  It's a banana republic situation.  
Every civilized country regulates its monopolies or keeps them under 
public ownership.  Of course property rights are themselves an 
artificial legal construct, so I suppose a Somali-level approach would 
be that you could string wires, but you'd need to hire warlords to 
guard them, and could steal whatever your warlords were able to rassle 
from competitors.  Ironically, Somalia does have a competitive mobile 
phone sector, since there is no government to regulate it and the 
warlord armies do guard their towers, but no wireline sector to speak of.


WISPs are less dependent on wireline rules than wireline ISPs, who are 
largely hurting due to malevolent FCC policies.  But they still depend 
on spectrum regulatory policies. which the FCC makes consistent with 
the law.  And many depend on wireline backhaul, where regulation is 
the only thing that keeps the monopolies from gouging worse than they 
do.  (I've got an article in the works about how the real digital 
divide is the way the ILECs have kept the fiber dividend -- the low 
per-bit cost of capacity on fiber -- away from their monopoly 
ratepayers, even though it operates in competitive markets.



On 7/16/2011 9:25 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
Well...again you have to go further back in history...before telecom 
regulation ..it was a Ma Bell monopoly ..and without 
regulation...there is a very good chance that it will again become a 
Ma Bell monopoly or maybe a duopoly...


Let's not forget that...

Faisal

On Jul 16, 2011, at 9:03 PM, RickG > wrote:



"it is Regulation (1996 Telecom Act) that
allowed us (ISP's) to be able to go into the business of providing
internet access and other communication services"

With all due respect, it's exactly the mindset that government 
"allows" us to be in business that IS the problem. Telecom Act or 
no, regulation or no, there should be no question that we are 
allowed to make a living the way we want to regardless.



 --
 Fred Goldsteink1io   fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
 ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/
 +1 617 795 2701





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


--
Scott Reed
Owner
NewWays Networking, LLC
Wireless Networking
Network Design, Installation and Adm

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[MDK]

+100 Rick.  And it is this fundamental philosophical perspective that I am 
asking WISPA to answer - what is the official position?   If there is none, 
then are all the positions and statements and arguments just convenient at the 
moment?   Does WISPA advocate for things that will result in higher regulatory 
hurdles?   

Where is the "We have a fundamental belief that free enterprise, unencumbered 
by artificial spectrum shortages or regulatory barriers is the only viable 
solution to America's broadband needs" statement?   And a few other statements 
of principles against which every written statement and every proposal is 
measured?   

Thus, all committees and all writers and all communication remains consistent 
in philosophy and message?   Is this being political?   Soemwhat, but the need 
to be so has been shoved upon us and if we're not dealing with it, then I see 
little hope of being a conversation leader, rather than just a "I wanna be 
heard" like all the rest.  

++
Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
541-969-8200  509-386-4589
++


From: RickG 
Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2011 6:03 PM
To: fai...@snappydsl.net ; WISPA General List 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire


"it is Regulation (1996 Telecom Act) that
allowed us (ISP's) to be able to go into the business of providing
internet access and other communication services"

With all due respect, it's exactly the mindset that government "allows" us to 
be in business that IS the problem. Telecom Act or no, regulation or no, there 
should be no question that we are allowed to make a living the way we want to 
regardless.




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[MDK]

Ok, lets get this in perspective.   I am one, uno, sole, lone person.  While 
I believe I am right, I am NOT interested in saying I have a right to impose 
my views on all this stuff on all the other members of WISPA.   Two years 
ago, I asked, prodded, and then nagged, to see if WISPA would voluntarily 
attempt to get some kind of consensus or perhaps at least write a standard 
of principles when it comes to the business philosophy.  I was booed down.

Like it or not, the semi-political aspects of business, being forced on us 
by an intrusive government, have to be dealt with.  Do you as members 
believe you have a RIGHT to be in business?  Without needing a license from 
some authority?  Do you actually believe in free and unencumbered 
enterprise?  Or does consensus fall elsewhere philosophically?

What are the guiding principles that drive WISPA's policy stands?  Is it 
just advantage for ourselves, however or wherever it can be found, including 
trying to get public money with strings that further tie our industry, or do 
you shoot for freedom first?  If it's not the latter, then me joining will 
not change the philosophy of WISPA and it's advocacy, and I see it's efforts 
as ultimately being negative, not positive for my life and future - 
translated as "no money from me".

Previous conversations on this list lead to a realization that some people 
are afraid to advocate a philosophy that runs counter to whatever ideology 
the regulators hold - as if being "yes men" will curry favor and therefore 
crumbs will fall in greater quantity from the master's table in DC.  But if 
you had a clear philosophy up front, I think you could attract far more 
allies, the kind that stick with you, and help change the conversation. 
You keep asking for people to  to set up and WORK for what you want, but 
continue to refuse to say what it is you intend to work for.

I again ask for the leadership to demonstrate leadership and make a clear 
and unambiguous philosophical stand - and if I can agree with it, then I 
will support with time and dollars and energy.   But until I know it's 
something I can back with a clear conscience, I (and others, as well) remain 
on the sidelines.

++
Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
541-969-8200  509-386-4589
++

--
From: "Forbes Mercy" 
Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2011 3:19 PM
To: "WISPA General List" 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

> I'm sorry I guess I missed you at the Legislative Committee list when I
> was putting this together sending out drafts and asking for comments and
> help .  WISPA is a representation of those who show up to help
> formulate consensus and policy, not my personal views.  So easy to throw
> darts at the end result when you wouldn't be part of the process, isn't 
> it?
>
 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[RickG]

And that's not "regulation", that's bribery and corruption! Maybe we need to
regulate the regualtors?!?!

On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 11:20 PM, Curtis Maurand wrote:

> On 7/15/2011 9:03 AM, Forbes Mercy wrote:
> > Forbes Mercy
> > WISPA VP/Legislative Chair
> Just to give you an idea of what  you're up against, the #1 provider of
> lobbying money and political donations to congress is the healthcare
> industry.  They are followed by the telecom industry.
>
> --Curtis Maurand
> Biddeford, ME 04005
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



-- 
-RickG



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Curtis Maurand]

On 7/15/2011 9:03 AM, Forbes Mercy wrote:
> Forbes Mercy
> WISPA VP/Legislative Chair
Just to give you an idea of what  you're up against, the #1 provider of 
lobbying money and political donations to congress is the healthcare 
industry.  They are followed by the telecom industry.

--Curtis Maurand
Biddeford, ME 04005



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Greg Ihnen]

money.
>> > But their REAL job is to defend us keeping it.  There are NOW myriad
>> > political allies to spread this message, to change the discussion from 
>> > "whom
>> > to screw out of lots of money" to "what is the best policy for the people
>> > and keep competition alive?"   And, that's the message that is NOT being
>> > advocated by WISPA, and it should be.
>> >
>> > You seem to think that the answer is to find the right pol to influence and
>> > the right committee members to lobby and the right allies to obstruct X or
>> > advance Y, but those are expediency, not principle.   They should be 
>> > TACTICS
>> > to a principled purpose, one that will attract others, on the basis of its
>> > soundness and validity.
>> >
>> > And lastly, about the FCC, the last administration's appointees were
>> > advocates for free markets and for competition and deregulation.  Not
>> > particularly effective ones, but at least they were not our enemy.   The
>> > current administration's people at the FCC are IN NO WAY our friend, for 
>> > any
>> > way, manner, or purpose, and everything they want is bad for us and the
>> > country.  STop talking political party talking points, and get some 
>> > reality.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ++
>> > Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
>> > 541-969-8200  509-386-4589
>> > ++
>> >
>> > --
>> > From: "Faisal Imtiaz"
>> > Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 8:01 PM
>> > To: "WISPA General List"
>> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire
>> >
>> >> Errr...  and your point is ?
>> >>
>> >> Ok, I am a nobody... I have seen / read your emails, not once can I say
>> >> I have been able to pick out a proposed specific, action or a plan of
>> >> action from you 
>> >>
>> >> My friend you and I can agree or dis-agree on concepts all day long...
>> >> but the point still remains ... I for myself still am not able to
>> >> ascertain what exactly is it that you have been proposing ? ( I
>> >> understand the anger at all of the powers to be part...and I beg to
>> >> differ when you start blaming ..'this administration'. I personally
>> >> have been watching and following the FCC stuff, on sliding slopes, for
>> >> the last 12 years..that according to my calculations has been multiple
>> >> administrations.)
>> >>
>> >> You clear your head, and try to articulate your position in a
>> >> non-partisan manner, which can be understood by the general public, and
>> >> put forward a reasonably understandable plan of action  I guarantee
>> >> you, you will have many here who would be willing to listen and follow
>> >> your lead..
>> >>
>> >> But if you continue expressing yourself in the convoluted manner, as in
>> >> your email belowthen there is a very high probability that these
>> >> will continue to be chalked off as "tirades" and "rants".
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> :)
>> >>
>> >> Faisal Imtiaz
>> >> Snappy Internet&  Telecom
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > 
>> > WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> > http://signup.wispa.org/
>> > 
>> >
>> > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>> >
>> > Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> >
>> > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>> >
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>> 
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> 
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> -RickG
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Fred Goldstein]

At 7/16/2011 09:41 PM, Scott Reed wrote:
I also noticed that the breakup of Ma Bell degraded service in many 
areas.  A monopoly by market demand is not necessarily bad.  A 
monopoly by regulation is bad.


Well, not necessarily.  Ma Bell's service was never consistent before 
the breakup, but their P.R. was good.


The monopoly occurred "naturally" from the time the Bell patents 
expired (1893) until the last competitors were gone in the 
1930s.  There were CLECs galore (called "independents" at the time, 
but not the geographic-monopoly independents of later years) in the 
1893-1920 era.  Bell bought Pupin's patent on the loading coil in the 
1890s, which gave them a monopoly on long distance (>10 miles or so), 
but local service was competitive in many places.  Independents 
pioneered dial; Bell was all-manual until the 1920s.  However, the 
economics of natural monopoly are real.  The larger market share 
means a lower unit cost, so the big guy almost always wins.  So by 
1934, when the Communications Act was passed, the monopoly already 
existed; FCC and state rules simply locked it in place (made it de jure).


The idea of TA96 was to de-monopolize.  Since the natural monopoly 
still exists, unbundling is a way to open the market, but the 2001 
FCC turned against it and the current one remains opposed, law notwithstanding.


The public Internet only exists because the FCC in 1966 started the 
Computer Inquiries, which created a bright line distinction between 
carriage ("basic service") and content ("enhanced service"), 
especially in 1980's Computer II. The ILECs hated that.  The FCC also 
rammed sharing and resale down their throats around 1976 -- before 
that, you couldn't lease a line between two companies unless one of 
them was a licensed common carrier (e.g., Western Union, one of Ma 
Bell's few authorized wholesale resellers).  How could you have an 
ISP without those rules?  However, in 2005 the FCC revoked the 
Computer Inquiry rules, in response to a Verizon request, which is 
what led to the whole Network Neutrality kerfuffle.


The "no regulation" approach would most likely involve granting ILECs 
full property rights on their networks, so they would have 
unregulated monopolies. Who does that benefit?  It's a banana 
republic situation.  Every civilized country regulates its monopolies 
or keeps them under public ownership.  Of course property rights are 
themselves an artificial legal construct, so I suppose a Somali-level 
approach would be that you could string wires, but you'd need to hire 
warlords to guard them, and could steal whatever your warlords were 
able to rassle from competitors.  Ironically, Somalia does have a 
competitive mobile phone sector, since there is no government to 
regulate it and the warlord armies do guard their towers, but no 
wireline sector to speak of.


WISPs are less dependent on wireline rules than wireline ISPs, who 
are largely hurting due to malevolent FCC policies.  But they still 
depend on spectrum regulatory policies. which the FCC makes 
consistent with the law.  And many depend on wireline backhaul, where 
regulation is the only thing that keeps the monopolies from gouging 
worse than they do.  (I've got an article in the works about how the 
real digital divide is the way the ILECs have kept the fiber dividend 
-- the low per-bit cost of capacity on fiber -- away from their 
monopoly ratepayers, even though it operates in competitive markets.



On 7/16/2011 9:25 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
Well...again you have to go further back in history...before 
telecom regulation ..it was a Ma Bell monopoly ..and without 
regulation...there is a very good chance that it will again become 
a Ma Bell monopoly or maybe a duopoly...


Let's not forget that...

Faisal

On Jul 16, 2011, at 9:03 PM, RickG 
<rgunder...@gmail.com> wrote:



"it is Regulation (1996 Telecom Act) that
allowed us (ISP's) to be able to go into the business of providing
internet access and other communication services"

With all due respect, it's exactly the mindset that government 
"allows" us to be in business that IS the problem. Telecom Act or 
no, regulation or no, there should be no question that we are 
allowed to make a living the way we want to regardless.




 --
 Fred Goldsteink1io   fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
 ionary Consulting  http://www.ionary.com/
 +1 617 795 2701 


WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Scott Reed]

t; becomes self evident - you always advocate FOR the proper and
best thing.
> And, after being consistent, year after year, and when stuff
like this comes
> up, which becomes so blatantly obviously a result of failure to
follow true
> principle, again, nothing is obscure or difficult.
>
> Additionally, I said absolutely NOTHING partisan.   Not even
ideological.
> It's simple straightforward business principles.   Principle
Numero Uno is
> "have the freedom to be in business", and there is nothing
convoluted or
> difficult about that.
>
> You seem to be interested in mere expediency.   That's what's
gotten us to
> this crisis point, the idea of managing the favoritism, the
cronyism, etc,
> to favor you, or at least not hurt you too much.   That's
what's BEEN going
> on.  Had we (WISPA) been looking for and actively seeking
allies who would
> with us, say with many voices, but one message - "hands off,
and be a
> steward of what's entrusted to you", I think the landscape
would look
> different.  The word "steward" is loaded.  It means one
entrusted to manage
> things for the benefit OF THE OWNER, that's us.The FCC and
Congress are
> managing for the benefit of the federal treasury and the
donations to
> campaigns - which is the polar opposite of managed for the good
of the
> people.
>
> In the previous post, I wrote an analogy, one where the city
effectively
> puts every service and business up for licensure at auction.
 It takes no
> imagination at all to see that the city coffers and the winning
bidder are
> the beneficiaries and the people are the losers.   Spectrum is
a public or
> national resource held in trust by the federal government.  
Auctions to the

> highest bidder do not benefit anyone but the monopoly holder
and the
> treasury, by creating monopolies or very limited competition.  
Again, we as

> consumers and businessmen are the losers.  Imagine if there
were enough
> spectrum delegated so that if us WISP's wanted to be mobile
broadband
> providers we could, as well as cellular, or even video / audio
broadcasters.
> Instead, such services have been delegated a minute slice of
available
> spectrum, keeping up the price of the auctions - and the number of
> competitors down.
>
> Why?   It is in the interest of politicians to separate us from
our money.
> But their REAL job is to defend us keeping it.  There are NOW
myriad
> political allies to spread this message, to change the
discussion from "whom
> to screw out of lots of money" to "what is the best policy for
the people
> and keep competition alive?"   And, that's the message that is
NOT being
> advocated by WISPA, and it should be.
>
> You seem to think that the answer is to find the right pol to
influence and
> the right committee members to lobby and the right allies to
obstruct X or
> advance Y, but those are expediency, not principle.   They
should be TACTICS
> to a principled purpose, one that will attract others, on the
basis of its
> soundness and validity.
>
> And lastly, about the FCC, the last administration's appointees
were
> advocates for free markets and for competition and
deregulation.  Not
> particularly effective ones, but at least they were not our
enemy.   The
> current administration's people at the FCC are IN NO WAY our
friend, for any
> way, manner, or purpose, and everything they want is bad for us
and the
> country.  STop talking political party talking points, and get
some reality.
>
>
>
> ++
> Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
> 541-969-8200 509-386-4589 
> ++
>
> --
> From: "Faisal Imtiaz"mailto:fai...@snappydsl.net>>
> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 8:01 PM
> To: "WISPA General List"mailto:wireless@wispa.org>>
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire
>
>> Errr...  and your point is ?
>>
>> Ok, I am a nobody... I have seen / read your emails, not once
can I say
>> I have been able to pick out a proposed specific, action or a
plan of
>> action from you 
>>
>> My friend you and I can agree or dis-agree on concepts all day
long...
&g

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Faisal Imtiaz]

obviously a result of failure to follow true
> > principle, again, nothing is obscure or difficult.
> >
> > Additionally, I said absolutely NOTHING partisan.   Not even ideological.
> > It's simple straightforward business principles.   Principle Numero Uno is
> > "have the freedom to be in business", and there is nothing convoluted or
> > difficult about that.
> >
> > You seem to be interested in mere expediency.   That's what's gotten us to
> > this crisis point, the idea of managing the favoritism, the cronyism, etc,
> > to favor you, or at least not hurt you too much.   That's what's BEEN going
> > on.  Had we (WISPA) been looking for and actively seeking allies who would
> > with us, say with many voices, but one message - "hands off, and be a
> > steward of what's entrusted to you", I think the landscape would look
> > different.  The word "steward" is loaded.  It means one entrusted to manage
> > things for the benefit OF THE OWNER, that's us.The FCC and Congress are
> > managing for the benefit of the federal treasury and the donations to
> > campaigns - which is the polar opposite of managed for the good of the
> > people.
> >
> > In the previous post, I wrote an analogy, one where the city effectively
> > puts every service and business up for licensure at auction.  It takes no
> > imagination at all to see that the city coffers and the winning bidder are
> > the beneficiaries and the people are the losers.   Spectrum is a public or
> > national resource held in trust by the federal government.   Auctions to the
> > highest bidder do not benefit anyone but the monopoly holder and the
> > treasury, by creating monopolies or very limited competition.   Again, we as
> > consumers and businessmen are the losers.  Imagine if there were enough
> > spectrum delegated so that if us WISP's wanted to be mobile broadband
> > providers we could, as well as cellular, or even video / audio broadcasters.
> > Instead, such services have been delegated a minute slice of available
> > spectrum, keeping up the price of the auctions - and the number of
> > competitors down.
> >
> > Why?   It is in the interest of politicians to separate us from our money.
> > But their REAL job is to defend us keeping it.  There are NOW myriad
> > political allies to spread this message, to change the discussion from "whom
> > to screw out of lots of money" to "what is the best policy for the people
> > and keep competition alive?"   And, that's the message that is NOT being
> > advocated by WISPA, and it should be.
> >
> > You seem to think that the answer is to find the right pol to influence and
> > the right committee members to lobby and the right allies to obstruct X or
> > advance Y, but those are expediency, not principle.   They should be TACTICS
> > to a principled purpose, one that will attract others, on the basis of its
> > soundness and validity.
> >
> > And lastly, about the FCC, the last administration's appointees were
> > advocates for free markets and for competition and deregulation.  Not
> > particularly effective ones, but at least they were not our enemy.   The
> > current administration's people at the FCC are IN NO WAY our friend, for any
> > way, manner, or purpose, and everything they want is bad for us and the
> > country.  STop talking political party talking points, and get some reality.
> >
> >
> >
> > ++
> > Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
> > 541-969-8200  509-386-4589
> > ++
> >
> > --
> > From: "Faisal Imtiaz"
> > Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 8:01 PM
> > To: "WISPA General List"
> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire
> >
> >> Errr...  and your point is ?
> >>
> >> Ok, I am a nobody... I have seen / read your emails, not once can I say
> >> I have been able to pick out a proposed specific, action or a plan of
> >> action from you 
> >>
> >> My friend you and I can agree or dis-agree on concepts all day long...
> >> but the point still remains ... I for myself still am not able to
> >> ascertain what exactly is it that you have been proposing ? ( I
> >> understand the anger at all of the powers to be part...and I beg to
> >> differ when you start blaming ..'this administration'. I personally
> >> have been watching and following the F

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[RickG]

 nothing convoluted or
> > difficult about that.
> >
> > You seem to be interested in mere expediency.   That's what's gotten us
> to
> > this crisis point, the idea of managing the favoritism, the cronyism,
> etc,
> > to favor you, or at least not hurt you too much.   That's what's BEEN
> going
> > on.  Had we (WISPA) been looking for and actively seeking allies who
> would
> > with us, say with many voices, but one message - "hands off, and be a
> > steward of what's entrusted to you", I think the landscape would look
> > different.  The word "steward" is loaded.  It means one entrusted to
> manage
> > things for the benefit OF THE OWNER, that's us.The FCC and Congress
> are
> > managing for the benefit of the federal treasury and the donations to
> > campaigns - which is the polar opposite of managed for the good of the
> > people.
> >
> > In the previous post, I wrote an analogy, one where the city effectively
> > puts every service and business up for licensure at auction.  It takes no
> > imagination at all to see that the city coffers and the winning bidder
> are
> > the beneficiaries and the people are the losers.   Spectrum is a public
> or
> > national resource held in trust by the federal government.   Auctions to
> the
> > highest bidder do not benefit anyone but the monopoly holder and the
> > treasury, by creating monopolies or very limited competition.   Again, we
> as
> > consumers and businessmen are the losers.  Imagine if there were enough
> > spectrum delegated so that if us WISP's wanted to be mobile broadband
> > providers we could, as well as cellular, or even video / audio
> broadcasters.
> > Instead, such services have been delegated a minute slice of available
> > spectrum, keeping up the price of the auctions - and the number of
> > competitors down.
> >
> > Why?   It is in the interest of politicians to separate us from our
> money.
> > But their REAL job is to defend us keeping it.  There are NOW myriad
> > political allies to spread this message, to change the discussion from
> "whom
> > to screw out of lots of money" to "what is the best policy for the people
> > and keep competition alive?"   And, that's the message that is NOT being
> > advocated by WISPA, and it should be.
> >
> > You seem to think that the answer is to find the right pol to influence
> and
> > the right committee members to lobby and the right allies to obstruct X
> or
> > advance Y, but those are expediency, not principle.   They should be
> TACTICS
> > to a principled purpose, one that will attract others, on the basis of
> its
> > soundness and validity.
> >
> > And lastly, about the FCC, the last administration's appointees were
> > advocates for free markets and for competition and deregulation.  Not
> > particularly effective ones, but at least they were not our enemy.   The
> > current administration's people at the FCC are IN NO WAY our friend, for
> any
> > way, manner, or purpose, and everything they want is bad for us and the
> > country.  STop talking political party talking points, and get some
> reality.
> >
> >
> >
> > ++
> > Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
> > 541-969-8200  509-386-4589
> > ++
> >
> > --
> > From: "Faisal Imtiaz"
> > Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 8:01 PM
> > To: "WISPA General List"
> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire
> >
> >> Errr...  and your point is ?
> >>
> >> Ok, I am a nobody... I have seen / read your emails, not once can I say
> >> I have been able to pick out a proposed specific, action or a plan of
> >> action from you 
> >>
> >> My friend you and I can agree or dis-agree on concepts all day long...
> >> but the point still remains ... I for myself still am not able to
> >> ascertain what exactly is it that you have been proposing ? ( I
> >> understand the anger at all of the powers to be part...and I beg to
> >> differ when you start blaming ..'this administration'. I personally
> >> have been watching and following the FCC stuff, on sliding slopes, for
> >> the last 12 years..that according to my calculations has been multiple
> >> administrations.)
> >>
> >> You clear your head, 

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[RickG]

 backside, potentially lethally.   The central notion we have to fight is
> >> that spectrum should be auctioned (revenue to the feds) to the highest
> >> bidder.   And someone, in their ignorance, has managed to commit an idea
> >> commensurate to your local city government suddenly deciding to create a
> >> "license to sell groceries"  and has structured it so that it is all
> tied to
> >> one auction, where any deep pockets bidder can remove the ability of all
> the
> >> incumbents to stay in business.   Instead of educating Congress, the FCC
> >> ,and our allies (if we have any) about how freedom to be in business has
> >> been the central mechanism by which a vast swath of America has great
> >> internet service,  we've quibbled over dollars and rules and tried to
> slant
> >> them for us against others - the very thinking we must now defeat.
> >>
> >> I have said we all stand on freedom, or fall together, and for this I
> have
> >> been branded as a radical, idiot, moron, right wing extremist, and so on
> -
> >> as such principles are, according to the self proclaimed 'wise men' of
> the
> >> group, outdated and unworkable.   Until we need them, of course.  Even
> the
> >> tortured and twisted explanation below is still trying to defend the big
> >> government crapola, and by now, it better be as clear and obvious to
> you, as
> >> a just hammered thumbnail, that NOTHING ELSE MATTERS IF WE DO NOT HAVE
> THE
> >> FREEDOM TO BE IN BUSINESS.
> >>
> >> I was at founding of WISPA.   I was there within a week or two of the
> >> interest list being formed, and I joined and donated money, until
> previous
> >> people of WISPA were found by me to be advocating FCC mandates on us.
> At
> >> which I resigned and will not rejoin until my money is no longer at risk
> of
> >> being used against our basic and fundamental freedoms.
> >>
> >> YEARS have been sqandered, because WISPA failed to advocate for freedom
> >> first, a consistent, principled basis for everything said, advocacy
> >> positions, etc.  Now, you have to suddenly "get religion", because
> >> EVERYONE's freedom is at stake, even our competition's,.   Rather than
> >> advocate for that, WISPA now has a history just as compromised as AT&T's
> and
> >> every lobbyist's, because it stood for little more than trying to bend
> the
> >> rules to favor US instead of "THEM".   Expediently, we've "discovered"
> that
> >> open markets mean open to competition, as well, something not advocated
> by
> >> WISPA before.
> >>
> >> I said in 2009 that there were people headed for Congress, a sea change
> >> coming, and that WISPA needed to get politically allied with the pro
> freedom
> >> crowd.  They were called radicals and idiots on this list instead.
> >>
> >> If you have even ONCE advocated for big government intervention...  For
> >> money your way, for regulation to favor you instead of them, for a
> chance to
> >> get your hands on the subsidies, or IN ANY WAY supported the notion of
> >> government intervention in the markets YOU are directly to blame for
> the
> >> mess we're facing.   YOU failed to stand for the ONE thing that matters,
> >> freedom.   I sure hope we win this fight.
> >>
> >> When I started posting about defending your right to be in business
> several
> >> years ago, it was because I had envisioned this happening, it was
> written on
> >> the wall, in big letters.  I told you so.  Are you going to get serious,
> or
> >> this just going to be just more arguments of convenience?
> >>
> >>
> >> ++
> >> Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
> >> 541-969-8200  509-386-4589
> >> ++
> >>
> >> --
> >> From: "Forbes Mercy"
> >> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 6:03 AM
> >> To:; "WISPA General List"
> >> Subject: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire
> >>
> >>> TO WISP's
> >>>
> >>> I'm not much of an alarmist and I would never claim the sky is falling
> >>> unless I had positive proof.  Right now WISPA is faced with what I
> >>> perceive as the most serious threat to our industry to date.  Some of
> >>> you may complain that the F

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Forbes Mercy]

d.  They were called radicals and idiots on this list instead.
>
> If you have even ONCE advocated for big government intervention...  For
> money your way, for regulation to favor you instead of them, for a chance to
> get your hands on the subsidies, or IN ANY WAY supported the notion of
> government intervention in the markets YOU are directly to blame for the
> mess we're facing.   YOU failed to stand for the ONE thing that matters,
> freedom.   I sure hope we win this fight.
>
> When I started posting about defending your right to be in business several
> years ago, it was because I had envisioned this happening, it was written on
> the wall, in big letters.  I told you so.  Are you going to get serious, or
> this just going to be just more arguments of convenience?
>
>
> ++
> Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
> 541-969-8200  509-386-4589
> ++
>
> --
> From: "Forbes Mercy"
> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 6:03 AM
> To:; "WISPA General List"
> Subject: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire
>
>> TO WISP's
>>
>> I'm not much of an alarmist and I would never claim the sky is falling
>> unless I had positive proof.  Right now WISPA is faced with what I
>> perceive as the most serious threat to our industry to date.  Some of
>> you may complain that the FCC is an overreaching intruder into our
>> business.  While Federal Government oversight and regulations into our
>> rapidly growing industry may seem intrusive WISPA has always had their
>> ear and we feel they listen and include us into much of their decision
>> making process.  There is no doubt they truly want nation-wide service
>> and recognize the lack of enthusiastic expansion by major players
>> (legacy carriers) into the rural area which is our strongest argument.
>>
>> Starting with Net Neutrality we noticed that Congress was starting to
>> politicize the work of the FCC.  Some of you thought that was a good
>> thing since you felt the FCC was slow in releasing frequencies.  The
>> micro-management of the FCC on that first issue has rapidly grown to
>> full fledged taking over of the FCC's mission.  Once the legacy
>> characters found that they could go around the FCC to Congress, where
>> they already give millions in "donations", they knew they had one big
>> leg up on small budget organizations like WISPA.  They are now flexing
>> their full lobbying muscle by getting some 'friends' in Congress to
>> introduce bills that would freeze any future expansion of the WISP
>> market locking us out of the lower frequencies that we need to penetrate
>> vegetation and terrain.  Much like teaching the Internet to your parents
>> other legislators look at the new laws with dazed amazement and just say
>> OK not realizing the ramifications and listening to the lobbyist spin.
>>
>> WISPA is not sitting back on this one, last year our board was not
>> afraid to go far out of budget to get our feet firmly in the door on
>> issues such as TV White Spaces (TV White Spaces) and the Universal
>> Service Fund change to Connect America Fund (CAF).  It appears all that
>> work is now under scrutiny by Congress and their answer seems to be one
>> of 'lets just put all frequencies up for bid, licensed and unlicensed'.
>> None of us WISP's could afford to bid against the likes of AT&T and
>> Verizon and it has the potential of locking all small business out of
>> any future frequencies.
>>
>> Yesterday the Legislative, FCC, and Promotions Committee of WISPA got
>> together and released a letter to all Congressional Members of several
>> committees relevant to this battle, in addition we paid to have a formal
>> press release sent to the media objecting to this path that both the
>> Senate and House seem to be pursuing.  We are now interviewing potential
>> Lobbyists (something we've never needed before) and, other firms that
>> can help us with this new front we have to fight on.
>>
>> Where WISPA will have to go to get the ear of Congress to stop this
>> insane path is all new to us but we are up to the challange.  We have
>> great legal counsel, members that can attend and testify hearings,
>> allies in other groups such as New America feel the pain like us on this
>> issue.  We will be making alliances, learning how to do social
>> networking to reach our members, our members subscribers and, anyone who
>> will side with us to form grass roots efforts to get the attention of
>> Con

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Mike Hammett]

much.   That's what's BEEN going
>> on.  Had we (WISPA) been looking for and actively seeking allies who would
>> with us, say with many voices, but one message - "hands off, and be a
>> steward of what's entrusted to you", I think the landscape would look
>> different.  The word "steward" is loaded.  It means one entrusted to manage
>> things for the benefit OF THE OWNER, that's us.The FCC and Congress are
>> managing for the benefit of the federal treasury and the donations to
>> campaigns - which is the polar opposite of managed for the good of the
>> people.
>>
>> In the previous post, I wrote an analogy, one where the city effectively
>> puts every service and business up for licensure at auction.  It takes no
>> imagination at all to see that the city coffers and the winning bidder are
>> the beneficiaries and the people are the losers.   Spectrum is a public or
>> national resource held in trust by the federal government.   Auctions to the
>> highest bidder do not benefit anyone but the monopoly holder and the
>> treasury, by creating monopolies or very limited competition.   Again, we as
>> consumers and businessmen are the losers.  Imagine if there were enough
>> spectrum delegated so that if us WISP's wanted to be mobile broadband
>> providers we could, as well as cellular, or even video / audio broadcasters.
>> Instead, such services have been delegated a minute slice of available
>> spectrum, keeping up the price of the auctions - and the number of
>> competitors down.
>>
>> Why?   It is in the interest of politicians to separate us from our money.
>> But their REAL job is to defend us keeping it.  There are NOW myriad
>> political allies to spread this message, to change the discussion from "whom
>> to screw out of lots of money" to "what is the best policy for the people
>> and keep competition alive?"   And, that's the message that is NOT being
>> advocated by WISPA, and it should be.
>>
>> You seem to think that the answer is to find the right pol to influence and
>> the right committee members to lobby and the right allies to obstruct X or
>> advance Y, but those are expediency, not principle.   They should be TACTICS
>> to a principled purpose, one that will attract others, on the basis of its
>> soundness and validity.
>>
>> And lastly, about the FCC, the last administration's appointees were
>> advocates for free markets and for competition and deregulation.  Not
>> particularly effective ones, but at least they were not our enemy.   The
>> current administration's people at the FCC are IN NO WAY our friend, for any
>> way, manner, or purpose, and everything they want is bad for us and the
>> country.  STop talking political party talking points, and get some reality.
>>
>>
>>
>> ++
>> Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
>> 541-969-8200  509-386-4589
>> ++
>>
>> --
>> From: "Faisal Imtiaz"
>> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 8:01 PM
>> To: "WISPA General List"
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire
>>
>>> Errr...  and your point is ?
>>>
>>> Ok, I am a nobody... I have seen / read your emails, not once can I say
>>> I have been able to pick out a proposed specific, action or a plan of
>>> action from you 
>>>
>>> My friend you and I can agree or dis-agree on concepts all day long...
>>> but the point still remains ... I for myself still am not able to
>>> ascertain what exactly is it that you have been proposing ? ( I
>>> understand the anger at all of the powers to be part...and I beg to
>>> differ when you start blaming ..'this administration'. I personally
>>> have been watching and following the FCC stuff, on sliding slopes, for
>>> the last 12 years..that according to my calculations has been multiple
>>> administrations.)
>>>
>>> You clear your head, and try to articulate your position in a
>>> non-partisan manner, which can be understood by the general public, and
>>> put forward a reasonably understandable plan of action  I guarantee
>>> you, you will have many here who would be willing to listen and follow
>>> your lead...
>>>
>>> But if you continue expressing yourself in the convoluted manner, as in
>>> your email belowthen th

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Faisal Imtiaz]

t; It's simple straightforward business principles.   Principle Numero Uno is
>> "have the freedom to be in business", and there is nothing convoluted or
>> difficult about that.
>>
>> You seem to be interested in mere expediency.   That's what's gotten us to
>> this crisis point, the idea of managing the favoritism, the cronyism, etc,
>> to favor you, or at least not hurt you too much.   That's what's BEEN going
>> on.  Had we (WISPA) been looking for and actively seeking allies who would
>> with us, say with many voices, but one message - "hands off, and be a
>> steward of what's entrusted to you", I think the landscape would look
>> different.  The word "steward" is loaded.  It means one entrusted to manage
>> things for the benefit OF THE OWNER, that's us.The FCC and Congress are
>> managing for the benefit of the federal treasury and the donations to
>> campaigns - which is the polar opposite of managed for the good of the
>> people.
>>
>> In the previous post, I wrote an analogy, one where the city effectively
>> puts every service and business up for licensure at auction.  It takes no
>> imagination at all to see that the city coffers and the winning bidder are
>> the beneficiaries and the people are the losers.   Spectrum is a public or
>> national resource held in trust by the federal government.   Auctions to the
>> highest bidder do not benefit anyone but the monopoly holder and the
>> treasury, by creating monopolies or very limited competition.   Again, we as
>> consumers and businessmen are the losers.  Imagine if there were enough
>> spectrum delegated so that if us WISP's wanted to be mobile broadband
>> providers we could, as well as cellular, or even video / audio broadcasters.
>> Instead, such services have been delegated a minute slice of available
>> spectrum, keeping up the price of the auctions - and the number of
>> competitors down.
>>
>> Why?   It is in the interest of politicians to separate us from our money.
>> But their REAL job is to defend us keeping it.  There are NOW myriad
>> political allies to spread this message, to change the discussion from "whom
>> to screw out of lots of money" to "what is the best policy for the people
>> and keep competition alive?"   And, that's the message that is NOT being
>> advocated by WISPA, and it should be.
>>
>> You seem to think that the answer is to find the right pol to influence and
>> the right committee members to lobby and the right allies to obstruct X or
>> advance Y, but those are expediency, not principle.   They should be TACTICS
>> to a principled purpose, one that will attract others, on the basis of its
>> soundness and validity.
>>
>> And lastly, about the FCC, the last administration's appointees were
>> advocates for free markets and for competition and deregulation.  Not
>> particularly effective ones, but at least they were not our enemy.   The
>> current administration's people at the FCC are IN NO WAY our friend, for any
>> way, manner, or purpose, and everything they want is bad for us and the
>> country.  STop talking political party talking points, and get some reality.
>>
>>
>>
>> ++
>> Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
>> 541-969-8200  509-386-4589
>> ++
>>
>> --
>> From: "Faisal Imtiaz"
>> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 8:01 PM
>> To: "WISPA General List"
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire
>>
>>> Errr...  and your point is ?
>>>
>>> Ok, I am a nobody... I have seen / read your emails, not once can I say
>>> I have been able to pick out a proposed specific, action or a plan of
>>> action from you 
>>>
>>> My friend you and I can agree or dis-agree on concepts all day long...
>>> but the point still remains ... I for myself still am not able to
>>> ascertain what exactly is it that you have been proposing ? ( I
>>> understand the anger at all of the powers to be part...and I beg to
>>> differ when you start blaming ..'this administration'. I personally
>>> have been watching and following the FCC stuff, on sliding slopes, for
>>> the last 12 years..that according to my calculations has been multiple
>>> administrations.)
>>>
>>> You clear your head, and try to articulate your

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Faisal Imtiaz]

he
> people.
>
> In the previous post, I wrote an analogy, one where the city effectively
> puts every service and business up for licensure at auction.  It takes no
> imagination at all to see that the city coffers and the winning bidder are
> the beneficiaries and the people are the losers.   Spectrum is a public or
> national resource held in trust by the federal government.   Auctions to the
> highest bidder do not benefit anyone but the monopoly holder and the
> treasury, by creating monopolies or very limited competition.   Again, we as
> consumers and businessmen are the losers.  Imagine if there were enough
> spectrum delegated so that if us WISP's wanted to be mobile broadband
> providers we could, as well as cellular, or even video / audio broadcasters.
> Instead, such services have been delegated a minute slice of available
> spectrum, keeping up the price of the auctions - and the number of
> competitors down.
>
> Why?   It is in the interest of politicians to separate us from our money.
> But their REAL job is to defend us keeping it.  There are NOW myriad
> political allies to spread this message, to change the discussion from "whom
> to screw out of lots of money" to "what is the best policy for the people
> and keep competition alive?"   And, that's the message that is NOT being
> advocated by WISPA, and it should be.
>
> You seem to think that the answer is to find the right pol to influence and
> the right committee members to lobby and the right allies to obstruct X or
> advance Y, but those are expediency, not principle.   They should be TACTICS
> to a principled purpose, one that will attract others, on the basis of its
> soundness and validity.
>
> And lastly, about the FCC, the last administration's appointees were
> advocates for free markets and for competition and deregulation.  Not
> particularly effective ones, but at least they were not our enemy.   The
> current administration's people at the FCC are IN NO WAY our friend, for any
> way, manner, or purpose, and everything they want is bad for us and the
> country.  STop talking political party talking points, and get some reality.
>
>
>
> ++
> Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
> 541-969-8200  509-386-4589
> ++
>
> --
> From: "Faisal Imtiaz"
> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 8:01 PM
> To: "WISPA General List"
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire
>
>> Errr...  and your point is ?
>>
>> Ok, I am a nobody... I have seen / read your emails, not once can I say
>> I have been able to pick out a proposed specific, action or a plan of
>> action from you 
>>
>> My friend you and I can agree or dis-agree on concepts all day long...
>> but the point still remains ... I for myself still am not able to
>> ascertain what exactly is it that you have been proposing ? ( I
>> understand the anger at all of the powers to be part...and I beg to
>> differ when you start blaming ..'this administration'. I personally
>> have been watching and following the FCC stuff, on sliding slopes, for
>> the last 12 years..that according to my calculations has been multiple
>> administrations.)
>>
>> You clear your head, and try to articulate your position in a
>> non-partisan manner, which can be understood by the general public, and
>> put forward a reasonably understandable plan of action  I guarantee
>> you, you will have many here who would be willing to listen and follow
>> your lead...
>>
>> But if you continue expressing yourself in the convoluted manner, as in
>> your email belowthen there is a very high probability that these
>> will continue to be chalked off as "tirades" and "rants".
>>
>>
>> :)
>>
>> Faisal Imtiaz
>> Snappy Internet&  Telecom
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Scott Reed]

gt;> incumbents to stay in business.   Instead of educating Congress, the FCC
>> ,and our allies (if we have any) about how freedom to be in business has
>> been the central mechanism by which a vast swath of America has great
>> internet service,  we've quibbled over dollars and rules and tried to slant
>> them for us against others - the very thinking we must now defeat.
>>
>> I have said we all stand on freedom, or fall together, and for this I have
>> been branded as a radical, idiot, moron, right wing extremist, and so on -
>> as such principles are, according to the self proclaimed 'wise men' of the
>> group, outdated and unworkable.   Until we need them, of course.  Even the
>> tortured and twisted explanation below is still trying to defend the big
>> government crapola, and by now, it better be as clear and obvious to you, as
>> a just hammered thumbnail, that NOTHING ELSE MATTERS IF WE DO NOT HAVE THE
>> FREEDOM TO BE IN BUSINESS.
>>
>> I was at founding of WISPA.   I was there within a week or two of the
>> interest list being formed, and I joined and donated money, until previous
>> people of WISPA were found by me to be advocating FCC mandates on us.   At
>> which I resigned and will not rejoin until my money is no longer at risk of
>> being used against our basic and fundamental freedoms.
>>
>> YEARS have been sqandered, because WISPA failed to advocate for freedom
>> first, a consistent, principled basis for everything said, advocacy
>> positions, etc.  Now, you have to suddenly "get religion", because
>> EVERYONE's freedom is at stake, even our competition's,.   Rather than
>> advocate for that, WISPA now has a history just as compromised as AT&T's and
>> every lobbyist's, because it stood for little more than trying to bend the
>> rules to favor US instead of "THEM".   Expediently, we've "discovered" that
>> open markets mean open to competition, as well, something not advocated by
>> WISPA before.
>>
>> I said in 2009 that there were people headed for Congress, a sea change
>> coming, and that WISPA needed to get politically allied with the pro freedom
>> crowd.  They were called radicals and idiots on this list instead.
>>
>> If you have even ONCE advocated for big government intervention...  For
>> money your way, for regulation to favor you instead of them, for a chance to
>> get your hands on the subsidies, or IN ANY WAY supported the notion of
>> government intervention in the markets YOU are directly to blame for the
>> mess we're facing.   YOU failed to stand for the ONE thing that matters,
>> freedom.   I sure hope we win this fight.
>>
>> When I started posting about defending your right to be in business several
>> years ago, it was because I had envisioned this happening, it was written on
>> the wall, in big letters.  I told you so.  Are you going to get serious, or
>> this just going to be just more arguments of convenience?
>>
>>
>> ++
>> Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
>> 541-969-8200  509-386-4589
>> ++
>>
>> --
>> From: "Forbes Mercy"
>> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 6:03 AM
>> To:; "WISPA General List"
>> Subject: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire
>>
>>> TO WISP's
>>>
>>> I'm not much of an alarmist and I would never claim the sky is falling
>>> unless I had positive proof.  Right now WISPA is faced with what I
>>> perceive as the most serious threat to our industry to date.  Some of
>>> you may complain that the FCC is an overreaching intruder into our
>>> business.  While Federal Government oversight and regulations into our
>>> rapidly growing industry may seem intrusive WISPA has always had their
>>> ear and we feel they listen and include us into much of their decision
>>> making process.  There is no doubt they truly want nation-wide service
>>> and recognize the lack of enthusiastic expansion by major players
>>> (legacy carriers) into the rural area which is our strongest argument.
>>>
>>> Starting with Net Neutrality we noticed that Congress was starting to
>>> politicize the work of the FCC.  Some of you thought that was a good
>>> thing since you felt the FCC was slow in releasing frequencies.  The
>>> micro-management of the FCC on that first issue has rapidly grown to
>>> full fledged taking over of the FCC's mission.  Once the leg

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Jason Bailey]

Mark,I think everyone knows you to be a very smart man.What do you suggest as a 
specific plan of action in the current situation.I think this is the best route 
to convey your message,with the impact you desire.  Jason

--- On Sat, 7/16/11, MDK  wrote:


From: MDK 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire
To: "WISPA General List" 
Date: Saturday, July 16, 2011, 12:59 AM


A "plan of action"?  If I said "this is what WISPA should do" and laid it 
out in detail, all you'd do is say "who are you?  Why should we hacve to do 
what you say?"

Frankly, I have no idea why you're having difficulty.  You see, when you 
have proper business principles as your guiding mechanism, what you should 
do is crystal clear.   Nobody needs to write out a plan of action, it 
becomes self evident - you always advocate FOR the proper and best thing. 
And, after being consistent, year after year, and when stuff like this comes 
up, which becomes so blatantly obviously a result of failure to follow true 
principle, again, nothing is obscure or difficult.

Additionally, I said absolutely NOTHING partisan.   Not even ideological. 
It's simple straightforward business principles.   Principle Numero Uno is 
"have the freedom to be in business", and there is nothing convoluted or 
difficult about that.

You seem to be interested in mere expediency.   That's what's gotten us to 
this crisis point, the idea of managing the favoritism, the cronyism, etc, 
to favor you, or at least not hurt you too much.   That's what's BEEN going 
on.  Had we (WISPA) been looking for and actively seeking allies who would 
with us, say with many voices, but one message - "hands off, and be a 
steward of what's entrusted to you", I think the landscape would look 
different.  The word "steward" is loaded.  It means one entrusted to manage 
things for the benefit OF THE OWNER, that's us.    The FCC and Congress are 
managing for the benefit of the federal treasury and the donations to 
campaigns - which is the polar opposite of managed for the good of the 
people.

In the previous post, I wrote an analogy, one where the city effectively 
puts every service and business up for licensure at auction.  It takes no 
imagination at all to see that the city coffers and the winning bidder are 
the beneficiaries and the people are the losers.   Spectrum is a public or 
national resource held in trust by the federal government.   Auctions to the 
highest bidder do not benefit anyone but the monopoly holder and the 
treasury, by creating monopolies or very limited competition.   Again, we as 
consumers and businessmen are the losers.  Imagine if there were enough 
spectrum delegated so that if us WISP's wanted to be mobile broadband 
providers we could, as well as cellular, or even video / audio broadcasters. 
Instead, such services have been delegated a minute slice of available 
spectrum, keeping up the price of the auctions - and the number of 
competitors down.

Why?   It is in the interest of politicians to separate us from our money. 
But their REAL job is to defend us keeping it.  There are NOW myriad 
political allies to spread this message, to change the discussion from "whom 
to screw out of lots of money" to "what is the best policy for the people 
and keep competition alive?"   And, that's the message that is NOT being 
advocated by WISPA, and it should be.

You seem to think that the answer is to find the right pol to influence and 
the right committee members to lobby and the right allies to obstruct X or 
advance Y, but those are expediency, not principle.   They should be TACTICS 
to a principled purpose, one that will attract others, on the basis of its 
soundness and validity.

And lastly, about the FCC, the last administration's appointees were 
advocates for free markets and for competition and deregulation.  Not 
particularly effective ones, but at least they were not our enemy.   The 
current administration's people at the FCC are IN NO WAY our friend, for any 
way, manner, or purpose, and everything they want is bad for us and the 
country.  STop talking political party talking points, and get some reality.



++
Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
541-969-8200  509-386-4589
++++++

------------------
From: "Faisal Imtiaz" 
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 8:01 PM
To: "WISPA General List" 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

> Errr...  and your point is ?
>
> Ok, I am a nobody... I have seen / read your emails, not once can I say
> I have been able to pick out a proposed specific, action or a plan of
> action from you 
>
> My friend you and I can agree or dis-agree on concepts all day long...
> but the point still remains ... I for 

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[MDK]

A "plan of action"?  If I said "this is what WISPA should do" and laid it 
out in detail, all you'd do is say "who are you?  Why should we hacve to do 
what you say?"

Frankly, I have no idea why you're having difficulty.  You see, when you 
have proper business principles as your guiding mechanism, what you should 
do is crystal clear.   Nobody needs to write out a plan of action, it 
becomes self evident - you always advocate FOR the proper and best thing. 
And, after being consistent, year after year, and when stuff like this comes 
up, which becomes so blatantly obviously a result of failure to follow true 
principle, again, nothing is obscure or difficult.

Additionally, I said absolutely NOTHING partisan.   Not even ideological. 
It's simple straightforward business principles.   Principle Numero Uno is 
"have the freedom to be in business", and there is nothing convoluted or 
difficult about that.

You seem to be interested in mere expediency.   That's what's gotten us to 
this crisis point, the idea of managing the favoritism, the cronyism, etc, 
to favor you, or at least not hurt you too much.   That's what's BEEN going 
on.  Had we (WISPA) been looking for and actively seeking allies who would 
with us, say with many voices, but one message - "hands off, and be a 
steward of what's entrusted to you", I think the landscape would look 
different.  The word "steward" is loaded.  It means one entrusted to manage 
things for the benefit OF THE OWNER, that's us.The FCC and Congress are 
managing for the benefit of the federal treasury and the donations to 
campaigns - which is the polar opposite of managed for the good of the 
people.

In the previous post, I wrote an analogy, one where the city effectively 
puts every service and business up for licensure at auction.  It takes no 
imagination at all to see that the city coffers and the winning bidder are 
the beneficiaries and the people are the losers.   Spectrum is a public or 
national resource held in trust by the federal government.   Auctions to the 
highest bidder do not benefit anyone but the monopoly holder and the 
treasury, by creating monopolies or very limited competition.   Again, we as 
consumers and businessmen are the losers.  Imagine if there were enough 
spectrum delegated so that if us WISP's wanted to be mobile broadband 
providers we could, as well as cellular, or even video / audio broadcasters. 
Instead, such services have been delegated a minute slice of available 
spectrum, keeping up the price of the auctions - and the number of 
competitors down.

Why?   It is in the interest of politicians to separate us from our money. 
But their REAL job is to defend us keeping it.  There are NOW myriad 
political allies to spread this message, to change the discussion from "whom 
to screw out of lots of money" to "what is the best policy for the people 
and keep competition alive?"   And, that's the message that is NOT being 
advocated by WISPA, and it should be.

You seem to think that the answer is to find the right pol to influence and 
the right committee members to lobby and the right allies to obstruct X or 
advance Y, but those are expediency, not principle.   They should be TACTICS 
to a principled purpose, one that will attract others, on the basis of its 
soundness and validity.

And lastly, about the FCC, the last administration's appointees were 
advocates for free markets and for competition and deregulation.  Not 
particularly effective ones, but at least they were not our enemy.   The 
current administration's people at the FCC are IN NO WAY our friend, for any 
way, manner, or purpose, and everything they want is bad for us and the 
country.  STop talking political party talking points, and get some reality.



++
Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
541-969-8200  509-386-4589
++

------------------
From: "Faisal Imtiaz" 
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 8:01 PM
To: "WISPA General List" 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

> Errr...  and your point is ?
>
> Ok, I am a nobody... I have seen / read your emails, not once can I say
> I have been able to pick out a proposed specific, action or a plan of
> action from you 
>
> My friend you and I can agree or dis-agree on concepts all day long...
> but the point still remains ... I for myself still am not able to
> ascertain what exactly is it that you have been proposing ? ( I
> understand the anger at all of the powers to be part...and I beg to
> differ when you start blaming ..'this administration'. I personally
> have been watching and following the FCC stuff, on sliding slopes, for
> the last 12 years..that according to my calcula

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Faisal Imtiaz]

ainst our basic and fundamental freedoms.
>
> YEARS have been sqandered, because WISPA failed to advocate for freedom
> first, a consistent, principled basis for everything said, advocacy
> positions, etc.  Now, you have to suddenly "get religion", because
> EVERYONE's freedom is at stake, even our competition's,.   Rather than
> advocate for that, WISPA now has a history just as compromised as AT&T's and
> every lobbyist's, because it stood for little more than trying to bend the
> rules to favor US instead of "THEM".   Expediently, we've "discovered" that
> open markets mean open to competition, as well, something not advocated by
> WISPA before.
>
> I said in 2009 that there were people headed for Congress, a sea change
> coming, and that WISPA needed to get politically allied with the pro freedom
> crowd.  They were called radicals and idiots on this list instead.
>
> If you have even ONCE advocated for big government intervention...  For
> money your way, for regulation to favor you instead of them, for a chance to
> get your hands on the subsidies, or IN ANY WAY supported the notion of
> government intervention in the markets YOU are directly to blame for the
> mess we're facing.   YOU failed to stand for the ONE thing that matters,
> freedom.   I sure hope we win this fight.
>
> When I started posting about defending your right to be in business several
> years ago, it was because I had envisioned this happening, it was written on
> the wall, in big letters.  I told you so.  Are you going to get serious, or
> this just going to be just more arguments of convenience?
>
>
> ++
> Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
> 541-969-8200  509-386-4589
> ++
>
> --
> From: "Forbes Mercy"
> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 6:03 AM
> To:; "WISPA General List"
> Subject: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire
>
>> TO WISP's
>>
>> I'm not much of an alarmist and I would never claim the sky is falling
>> unless I had positive proof.  Right now WISPA is faced with what I
>> perceive as the most serious threat to our industry to date.  Some of
>> you may complain that the FCC is an overreaching intruder into our
>> business.  While Federal Government oversight and regulations into our
>> rapidly growing industry may seem intrusive WISPA has always had their
>> ear and we feel they listen and include us into much of their decision
>> making process.  There is no doubt they truly want nation-wide service
>> and recognize the lack of enthusiastic expansion by major players
>> (legacy carriers) into the rural area which is our strongest argument.
>>
>> Starting with Net Neutrality we noticed that Congress was starting to
>> politicize the work of the FCC.  Some of you thought that was a good
>> thing since you felt the FCC was slow in releasing frequencies.  The
>> micro-management of the FCC on that first issue has rapidly grown to
>> full fledged taking over of the FCC's mission.  Once the legacy
>> characters found that they could go around the FCC to Congress, where
>> they already give millions in "donations", they knew they had one big
>> leg up on small budget organizations like WISPA.  They are now flexing
>> their full lobbying muscle by getting some 'friends' in Congress to
>> introduce bills that would freeze any future expansion of the WISP
>> market locking us out of the lower frequencies that we need to penetrate
>> vegetation and terrain.  Much like teaching the Internet to your parents
>> other legislators look at the new laws with dazed amazement and just say
>> OK not realizing the ramifications and listening to the lobbyist spin.
>>
>> WISPA is not sitting back on this one, last year our board was not
>> afraid to go far out of budget to get our feet firmly in the door on
>> issues such as TV White Spaces (TV White Spaces) and the Universal
>> Service Fund change to Connect America Fund (CAF).  It appears all that
>> work is now under scrutiny by Congress and their answer seems to be one
>> of 'lets just put all frequencies up for bid, licensed and unlicensed'.
>> None of us WISP's could afford to bid against the likes of AT&T and
>> Verizon and it has the potential of locking all small business out of
>> any future frequencies.
>>
>> Yesterday the Legislative, FCC, and Promotions Committee of WISPA got
>> together and released a letter to all Congressional Members of several
>> committees relevant to this battle

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[MDK]

you so.  Are you going to get serious, or 
this just going to be just more arguments of convenience?


++
Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
541-969-8200  509-386-4589
++

--
From: "Forbes Mercy" 
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 6:03 AM
To: ; "WISPA General List" 
Subject: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

> TO WISP's
>
> I'm not much of an alarmist and I would never claim the sky is falling
> unless I had positive proof.  Right now WISPA is faced with what I
> perceive as the most serious threat to our industry to date.  Some of
> you may complain that the FCC is an overreaching intruder into our
> business.  While Federal Government oversight and regulations into our
> rapidly growing industry may seem intrusive WISPA has always had their
> ear and we feel they listen and include us into much of their decision
> making process.  There is no doubt they truly want nation-wide service
> and recognize the lack of enthusiastic expansion by major players
> (legacy carriers) into the rural area which is our strongest argument.
>
> Starting with Net Neutrality we noticed that Congress was starting to
> politicize the work of the FCC.  Some of you thought that was a good
> thing since you felt the FCC was slow in releasing frequencies.  The
> micro-management of the FCC on that first issue has rapidly grown to
> full fledged taking over of the FCC's mission.  Once the legacy
> characters found that they could go around the FCC to Congress, where
> they already give millions in "donations", they knew they had one big
> leg up on small budget organizations like WISPA.  They are now flexing
> their full lobbying muscle by getting some 'friends' in Congress to
> introduce bills that would freeze any future expansion of the WISP
> market locking us out of the lower frequencies that we need to penetrate
> vegetation and terrain.  Much like teaching the Internet to your parents
> other legislators look at the new laws with dazed amazement and just say
> OK not realizing the ramifications and listening to the lobbyist spin.
>
> WISPA is not sitting back on this one, last year our board was not
> afraid to go far out of budget to get our feet firmly in the door on
> issues such as TV White Spaces (TV White Spaces) and the Universal
> Service Fund change to Connect America Fund (CAF).  It appears all that
> work is now under scrutiny by Congress and their answer seems to be one
> of 'lets just put all frequencies up for bid, licensed and unlicensed'.
> None of us WISP's could afford to bid against the likes of AT&T and
> Verizon and it has the potential of locking all small business out of
> any future frequencies.
>
> Yesterday the Legislative, FCC, and Promotions Committee of WISPA got
> together and released a letter to all Congressional Members of several
> committees relevant to this battle, in addition we paid to have a formal
> press release sent to the media objecting to this path that both the
> Senate and House seem to be pursuing.  We are now interviewing potential
> Lobbyists (something we've never needed before) and, other firms that
> can help us with this new front we have to fight on.
>
> Where WISPA will have to go to get the ear of Congress to stop this
> insane path is all new to us but we are up to the challange.  We have
> great legal counsel, members that can attend and testify hearings,
> allies in other groups such as New America feel the pain like us on this
> issue.  We will be making alliances, learning how to do social
> networking to reach our members, our members subscribers and, anyone who
> will side with us to form grass roots efforts to get the attention of
> Congress.  At this point we are not asking for a special assessment or
> other means to aggressively answer this call, we are within budget so
> far but it's hard to say how far this will go.  We simply are asking you
> to watch closely what we inform membership, prepare to be involved
> because unless you are content with the current frequencies and rules we
> are under you will directly be affected by this Congressional action.
>
> If we give in to these irrational rules don't think Congress or the
> legacy characters will stop there, if they sell the revenue model
> successfully they could go after existing frequencies too.  WISPA will
> be releasing talking points next week so that you can help us by making
> appointments with your Congressperson while they are in district during
> the month of August.  We really need to educate them that this path is
> bad for America and their constituents.  If you need constant updates
&g

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Jeff Broadwick - Lists]

I hope everyone on the List reads this post Tom!  You nailed it.  Just
because the minority bill does less damage, doesn't mean that we should
support it!

Regards,

Jeff
ImageStream Sales Manager
800-813-5123 x106

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 11:07 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

It should be noted that the today that we face is not neceesarilly an 
indication of a bad thing. It was just a fork in the road, and the big telco

lobbiests reached the fork shortly before us.
What we have here is a chance to make a meaningful permanent change on 
spectrum policy.  A fast track that doesn;t come along often. Congress has 
that power.
But with every opportunity there also comes risk attached, and the risk is 
great if we are not at the top of our game.
This is NOT the time to be weak, it is the time that demands strength and 
persistence. This is where we say, we dont give up and aren't willing to go 
away, and we simply aren't going to let congress try to take our innovative 
drive away.

And where we have the courage and responsibilty to call it like we see it, 
and not accept when the FCC does wrong,  we also have the equal obligation 
to defend our FCC that we have intemently interacted with over the years.

When I testified on NetNEutrality for the republicans, ATT claimed to be for

the NetNeutrality rules. The republicans, dragged out the truth that ATT did

NOT like the rules, they just agreed that they were less harmful than the 
rules could have been, and they were willing to reduce risk, and except less

harmful rules. The republicans were quick to use that to there advantage and

argue that "settling for less harmful" should not be adequate testimony to 
contitute being in favor of, and that we should have rules that benefit us, 
not just that are less harmful, if we are to have successful broadband 
policy. I see no reason we cant use that same arguement against the House 
committee.

Right now, the majority bill is horrid. So we show more support for the 
minority companion bill that is less harmful.  Allthough we can agree and 
testify that the new minority bill is less harmful and preverable than the 
other, we can not loose focus that both bills are harmful in some capacity. 
We need to tell congress what we honestly really think, and we need a 
stronger stance.

A very very relevent point is that there has been an eight year public open 
process on whitespace where 3 administrations had been involved ans all 
concluded the value of unlicensed and allocation of Whitespace to unlicensed

in significant capacity. For congress to undermine that would be undermining

public opinion. There is proof, 8 years of FCC records showing that the 
FCC's decission represented the public interests. Congresss has an 
obligation to represent the public interest.

I would argue that the only evidence that we need to support our claim is 
submit FCC historical record as evidence.  In my opinion, ignoring that 
evidence in favor of big money lobbyiest, or to assist with poor federal 
budgeting,  would be corruption.

The bills are scary, but that does not mean we have to let them pass.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Forbes Mercy" 
To: ; "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 9:03 AM
Subject: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire


> TO WISP's
>
> I'm not much of an alarmist and I would never claim the sky is falling
> unless I had positive proof.  Right now WISPA is faced with what I
> perceive as the most serious threat to our industry to date.  Some of
> you may complain that the FCC is an overreaching intruder into our
> business.  While Federal Government oversight and regulations into our
> rapidly growing industry may seem intrusive WISPA has always had their
> ear and we feel they listen and include us into much of their decision
> making process.  There is no doubt they truly want nation-wide service
> and recognize the lack of enthusiastic expansion by major players
> (legacy carriers) into the rural area which is our strongest argument.
>
> Starting with Net Neutrality we noticed that Congress was starting to
> politicize the work of the FCC.  Some of you thought that was a good
> thing since you felt the FCC was slow in releasing frequencies.  The
> micro-management of the FCC on that first issue has rapidly grown to
> full fledged taking over of the FCC's mission.  Once the legacy
> characters found that they could go around the FCC to Congress, where
> they already give millions in "donations", they knew they had one big
> leg up on small budget organizations like WISPA.  They are now flexing
> 

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Tom DeReggi]

It should be noted that the today that we face is not neceesarilly an 
indication of a bad thing. It was just a fork in the road, and the big telco 
lobbiests reached the fork shortly before us.
What we have here is a chance to make a meaningful permanent change on 
spectrum policy.  A fast track that doesn;t come along often. Congress has 
that power.
But with every opportunity there also comes risk attached, and the risk is 
great if we are not at the top of our game.
This is NOT the time to be weak, it is the time that demands strength and 
persistence. This is where we say, we dont give up and aren't willing to go 
away, and we simply aren't going to let congress try to take our innovative 
drive away.

And where we have the courage and responsibilty to call it like we see it, 
and not accept when the FCC does wrong,  we also have the equal obligation 
to defend our FCC that we have intemently interacted with over the years.

When I testified on NetNEutrality for the republicans, ATT claimed to be for 
the NetNeutrality rules. The republicans, dragged out the truth that ATT did 
NOT like the rules, they just agreed that they were less harmful than the 
rules could have been, and they were willing to reduce risk, and except less 
harmful rules. The republicans were quick to use that to there advantage and 
argue that "settling for less harmful" should not be adequate testimony to 
contitute being in favor of, and that we should have rules that benefit us, 
not just that are less harmful, if we are to have successful broadband 
policy. I see no reason we cant use that same arguement against the House 
committee.

Right now, the majority bill is horrid. So we show more support for the 
minority companion bill that is less harmful.  Allthough we can agree and 
testify that the new minority bill is less harmful and preverable than the 
other, we can not loose focus that both bills are harmful in some capacity. 
We need to tell congress what we honestly really think, and we need a 
stronger stance.

A very very relevent point is that there has been an eight year public open 
process on whitespace where 3 administrations had been involved ans all 
concluded the value of unlicensed and allocation of Whitespace to unlicensed 
in significant capacity. For congress to undermine that would be undermining 
public opinion. There is proof, 8 years of FCC records showing that the 
FCC's decission represented the public interests. Congresss has an 
obligation to represent the public interest.

I would argue that the only evidence that we need to support our claim is 
submit FCC historical record as evidence.  In my opinion, ignoring that 
evidence in favor of big money lobbyiest, or to assist with poor federal 
budgeting,  would be corruption.

The bills are scary, but that does not mean we have to let them pass.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Forbes Mercy" 
To: ; "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 9:03 AM
Subject: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire


> TO WISP's
>
> I'm not much of an alarmist and I would never claim the sky is falling
> unless I had positive proof.  Right now WISPA is faced with what I
> perceive as the most serious threat to our industry to date.  Some of
> you may complain that the FCC is an overreaching intruder into our
> business.  While Federal Government oversight and regulations into our
> rapidly growing industry may seem intrusive WISPA has always had their
> ear and we feel they listen and include us into much of their decision
> making process.  There is no doubt they truly want nation-wide service
> and recognize the lack of enthusiastic expansion by major players
> (legacy carriers) into the rural area which is our strongest argument.
>
> Starting with Net Neutrality we noticed that Congress was starting to
> politicize the work of the FCC.  Some of you thought that was a good
> thing since you felt the FCC was slow in releasing frequencies.  The
> micro-management of the FCC on that first issue has rapidly grown to
> full fledged taking over of the FCC's mission.  Once the legacy
> characters found that they could go around the FCC to Congress, where
> they already give millions in "donations", they knew they had one big
> leg up on small budget organizations like WISPA.  They are now flexing
> their full lobbying muscle by getting some 'friends' in Congress to
> introduce bills that would freeze any future expansion of the WISP
> market locking us out of the lower frequencies that we need to penetrate
> vegetation and terrain.  Much like teaching the Internet to your parents
> other legislators look at the new laws with dazed amazement and just say
> OK not realizing the ramifications and listening to the lobbyist sp

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Aaron D. Osgood]

Might I suggest speaking with Dave Wenhold? He has done WONDERS for another
small association with similar needs, ATSI ( www.atsi.org )

His contact info is:

Dave Wenhold, CAE, PLC
Miller/Wenhold Capitol Strategies
10623 Jones Street
Suite 101-A
Fairfax, VA 22030

P: (703) 927-1453
F: (703) 935-2266
E: dwenh...@mwcapitol.com
W: www.mwcapitol.com



I've taken the liberty of CC'ing him with this note


Aaron D. Osgood 

Streamline Solutions L.L.C

P.O. Box 6115
Falmouth, ME 04105

TEL: 207-781-5561
MOBILE: 207-831-5829
ICQ: 206889374
GVoice: 207.518.8455
GTalk: aaron.osgood
aosg...@streamline-solutions.net 
http://www.streamline-solutions.net

Introducing Efficiency to Business since 1986. 


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Forbes Mercy
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 9:04 AM
To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

TO WISP's

I'm not much of an alarmist and I would never claim the sky is falling 
unless I had positive proof.  Right now WISPA is faced with what I 
perceive as the most serious threat to our industry to date.  Some of 
you may complain that the FCC is an overreaching intruder into our 
business.  While Federal Government oversight and regulations into our 
rapidly growing industry may seem intrusive WISPA has always had their 
ear and we feel they listen and include us into much of their decision 
making process.  There is no doubt they truly want nation-wide service 
and recognize the lack of enthusiastic expansion by major players 
(legacy carriers) into the rural area which is our strongest argument.

Starting with Net Neutrality we noticed that Congress was starting to 
politicize the work of the FCC.  Some of you thought that was a good 
thing since you felt the FCC was slow in releasing frequencies.  The 
micro-management of the FCC on that first issue has rapidly grown to 
full fledged taking over of the FCC's mission.  Once the legacy 
characters found that they could go around the FCC to Congress, where 
they already give millions in "donations", they knew they had one big 
leg up on small budget organizations like WISPA.  They are now flexing 
their full lobbying muscle by getting some 'friends' in Congress to 
introduce bills that would freeze any future expansion of the WISP 
market locking us out of the lower frequencies that we need to penetrate 
vegetation and terrain.  Much like teaching the Internet to your parents 
other legislators look at the new laws with dazed amazement and just say 
OK not realizing the ramifications and listening to the lobbyist spin.

WISPA is not sitting back on this one, last year our board was not 
afraid to go far out of budget to get our feet firmly in the door on 
issues such as TV White Spaces (TV White Spaces) and the Universal 
Service Fund change to Connect America Fund (CAF).  It appears all that 
work is now under scrutiny by Congress and their answer seems to be one 
of 'lets just put all frequencies up for bid, licensed and unlicensed'.  
None of us WISP's could afford to bid against the likes of AT&T and 
Verizon and it has the potential of locking all small business out of 
any future frequencies.

Yesterday the Legislative, FCC, and Promotions Committee of WISPA got 
together and released a letter to all Congressional Members of several 
committees relevant to this battle, in addition we paid to have a formal 
press release sent to the media objecting to this path that both the 
Senate and House seem to be pursuing.  We are now interviewing potential 
Lobbyists (something we've never needed before) and, other firms that 
can help us with this new front we have to fight on.

Where WISPA will have to go to get the ear of Congress to stop this 
insane path is all new to us but we are up to the challange.  We have 
great legal counsel, members that can attend and testify hearings, 
allies in other groups such as New America feel the pain like us on this 
issue.  We will be making alliances, learning how to do social 
networking to reach our members, our members subscribers and, anyone who 
will side with us to form grass roots efforts to get the attention of 
Congress.  At this point we are not asking for a special assessment or 
other means to aggressively answer this call, we are within budget so 
far but it's hard to say how far this will go.  We simply are asking you 
to watch closely what we inform membership, prepare to be involved 
because unless you are content with the current frequencies and rules we 
are under you will directly be affected by this Congressional action.

If we give in to these irrational rules don't think Congress or the 
legacy characters will stop there, if they sell the revenue model 
successfully they could go after existing frequencies too.  WISPA will 
be releasing talking points next week so that you

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Jeff Broadwick - Lists]

It's great to rail against Congress but everyone should understand that,
whether we agree with them or not, this IS ultimately their responsibility.
Agencies such as the FCC have often taken somewhat vague (often
intentionally vague) legislation and taken actions/made rules far beyond
what the signers of the law intended.  Net Neutrality is just one example of
this.

Personally, I'd rather that ELECTED bodies make these decisions, rather than
some politically appointed board.  Elected officials MUST respond to their
voters.  Appointed board members only have to keep those who appointed them
happy.

Most Congressmen/women have no idea that this discussion is even taking
place (other than those on the committee, and perhaps some of the
leadership).  If they had heard of it, they likely had no idea what it
meant.  435 + 100 people (mostly lawyers) cannot be expected to understand
every single technical aspect of this sort of legislation.  That's why
WISPA, its members and friends, equipment manufacturers, and probably most
importantly YOUR CUSTOMERS must inform them.

I'm sure it's forthcoming, but a list of all the Congress members on the
relevant committees with their contact info would be most helpful.  That and
the official WISPA position (in plain language) will allow us to leverage
all of our assets to go after this wrong-headed legislation.  

Once we are armed with this information, every member should contact their
Congressman...remember, many of them were just elected in 2010 for the first
time.  Their heads are still spinning, and they are also more likely to be
responsive than some 40 year vet. 


Regards,

Jeff
ImageStream Sales Manager
800-813-5123 x106

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Forbes Mercy
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 9:04 AM
To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

TO WISP's

I'm not much of an alarmist and I would never claim the sky is falling 
unless I had positive proof.  Right now WISPA is faced with what I 
perceive as the most serious threat to our industry to date.  Some of 
you may complain that the FCC is an overreaching intruder into our 
business.  While Federal Government oversight and regulations into our 
rapidly growing industry may seem intrusive WISPA has always had their 
ear and we feel they listen and include us into much of their decision 
making process.  There is no doubt they truly want nation-wide service 
and recognize the lack of enthusiastic expansion by major players 
(legacy carriers) into the rural area which is our strongest argument.

Starting with Net Neutrality we noticed that Congress was starting to 
politicize the work of the FCC.  Some of you thought that was a good 
thing since you felt the FCC was slow in releasing frequencies.  The 
micro-management of the FCC on that first issue has rapidly grown to 
full fledged taking over of the FCC's mission.  Once the legacy 
characters found that they could go around the FCC to Congress, where 
they already give millions in "donations", they knew they had one big 
leg up on small budget organizations like WISPA.  They are now flexing 
their full lobbying muscle by getting some 'friends' in Congress to 
introduce bills that would freeze any future expansion of the WISP 
market locking us out of the lower frequencies that we need to penetrate 
vegetation and terrain.  Much like teaching the Internet to your parents 
other legislators look at the new laws with dazed amazement and just say 
OK not realizing the ramifications and listening to the lobbyist spin.

WISPA is not sitting back on this one, last year our board was not 
afraid to go far out of budget to get our feet firmly in the door on 
issues such as TV White Spaces (TV White Spaces) and the Universal 
Service Fund change to Connect America Fund (CAF).  It appears all that 
work is now under scrutiny by Congress and their answer seems to be one 
of 'lets just put all frequencies up for bid, licensed and unlicensed'.  
None of us WISP's could afford to bid against the likes of AT&T and 
Verizon and it has the potential of locking all small business out of 
any future frequencies.

Yesterday the Legislative, FCC, and Promotions Committee of WISPA got 
together and released a letter to all Congressional Members of several 
committees relevant to this battle, in addition we paid to have a formal 
press release sent to the media objecting to this path that both the 
Senate and House seem to be pursuing.  We are now interviewing potential 
Lobbyists (something we've never needed before) and, other firms that 
can help us with this new front we have to fight on.

Where WISPA will have to go to get the ear of Congress to stop this 
insane path is all new to us but we are up to the challange.  We have 
great legal counsel, members that can at

[WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

[Forbes Mercy]

TO WISP's

I'm not much of an alarmist and I would never claim the sky is falling 
unless I had positive proof.  Right now WISPA is faced with what I 
perceive as the most serious threat to our industry to date.  Some of 
you may complain that the FCC is an overreaching intruder into our 
business.  While Federal Government oversight and regulations into our 
rapidly growing industry may seem intrusive WISPA has always had their 
ear and we feel they listen and include us into much of their decision 
making process.  There is no doubt they truly want nation-wide service 
and recognize the lack of enthusiastic expansion by major players 
(legacy carriers) into the rural area which is our strongest argument.

Starting with Net Neutrality we noticed that Congress was starting to 
politicize the work of the FCC.  Some of you thought that was a good 
thing since you felt the FCC was slow in releasing frequencies.  The 
micro-management of the FCC on that first issue has rapidly grown to 
full fledged taking over of the FCC's mission.  Once the legacy 
characters found that they could go around the FCC to Congress, where 
they already give millions in "donations", they knew they had one big 
leg up on small budget organizations like WISPA.  They are now flexing 
their full lobbying muscle by getting some 'friends' in Congress to 
introduce bills that would freeze any future expansion of the WISP 
market locking us out of the lower frequencies that we need to penetrate 
vegetation and terrain.  Much like teaching the Internet to your parents 
other legislators look at the new laws with dazed amazement and just say 
OK not realizing the ramifications and listening to the lobbyist spin.

WISPA is not sitting back on this one, last year our board was not 
afraid to go far out of budget to get our feet firmly in the door on 
issues such as TV White Spaces (TV White Spaces) and the Universal 
Service Fund change to Connect America Fund (CAF).  It appears all that 
work is now under scrutiny by Congress and their answer seems to be one 
of 'lets just put all frequencies up for bid, licensed and unlicensed'.  
None of us WISP's could afford to bid against the likes of AT&T and 
Verizon and it has the potential of locking all small business out of 
any future frequencies.

Yesterday the Legislative, FCC, and Promotions Committee of WISPA got 
together and released a letter to all Congressional Members of several 
committees relevant to this battle, in addition we paid to have a formal 
press release sent to the media objecting to this path that both the 
Senate and House seem to be pursuing.  We are now interviewing potential 
Lobbyists (something we've never needed before) and, other firms that 
can help us with this new front we have to fight on.

Where WISPA will have to go to get the ear of Congress to stop this 
insane path is all new to us but we are up to the challange.  We have 
great legal counsel, members that can attend and testify hearings, 
allies in other groups such as New America feel the pain like us on this 
issue.  We will be making alliances, learning how to do social 
networking to reach our members, our members subscribers and, anyone who 
will side with us to form grass roots efforts to get the attention of 
Congress.  At this point we are not asking for a special assessment or 
other means to aggressively answer this call, we are within budget so 
far but it's hard to say how far this will go.  We simply are asking you 
to watch closely what we inform membership, prepare to be involved 
because unless you are content with the current frequencies and rules we 
are under you will directly be affected by this Congressional action.

If we give in to these irrational rules don't think Congress or the 
legacy characters will stop there, if they sell the revenue model 
successfully they could go after existing frequencies too.  WISPA will 
be releasing talking points next week so that you can help us by making 
appointments with your Congressperson while they are in district during 
the month of August.  We really need to educate them that this path is 
bad for America and their constituents.  If you need constant updates 
please join the Legislative Committee as we will be posting most of the 
Legislative work in that venue.  Thank you for your time and we 
appreciate you realizing the huge task we have ahead of us.

Forbes Mercy
WISPA VP/Legislative Chair



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/