http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills info@washingtonwatch.com http://www.pjdoland.com/chai/?v=0.1 http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_2919.html#45438 The communication companies are paid for providing the Internet service. Limiting or restricting the contest of traffic is limitation of the First Amendment. It is practiced in such dictator-ruled countries as Belarus. This should not take place in the US.... 45438@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Thu, 23 Oct 2008 13:37:03 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_2919.html#39870 Unless all calls are wireless to wireless, they need the PSTN infrastructure to complete the call. In order to maintain the PSTN network, the wireline companies need to receive the monies for completing the calls. It's not that difficult to understand. Take away the infrastructure and try to place a call using the PSTN.... 39870@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Wed, 06 Aug 2008 13:22:19 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_2919.html#39472 The issue at hand is not whether we should embrace the future, it is that the companies who have built the wireline network should be paid for the investment and infrastructure that are currently being used free of charge by the "innovative" voice providers. They are, in effect, stealing by not paying access fees.... 39472@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Mon, 28 Jul 2008 11:56:15 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_2919.html#37603 This is a bad idea. When Senator Stevens introduced this so called “Phantom Traffic” legislation, he said rural phone companies should be allowed to block your ability to use VoIP and innovative voice tools because they don’t have a telephone number always associated with the web site, button, or facebook application. We should be embarcing the future, not trying to make the future looks like yesterday. This one is a looser.... 37603@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Tue, 17 Jun 2008 13:33:03 EDT