The Verge offers a public service for American voters, compiling the votes on the Internet No-Privacy Bill HJRes 43 and the money received from Big ISPs. Thus we discover that Senator Dean Heller received $78,950 from industry sources, which doesn’t put him “up there” with the $251,110 given to Senator Mitch McConnell, and the $215,000 awarded to Senator John Thune, but nevertheless a nice contribution.
Representative Mark Amodei (R-NV2) received a tidy $22,000 contribution from the industry coffers.
What the resolution does is muddy the waters about enforcement of FCC rules, Verge explains:
“That brings us to the privacy rules. Through a rarely invoked law, Congress was able to take back the privacy rules set by Wheeler, effectively undoing his interpretation of what the Telecom Act says about customer data. That leaves a gap: we don’t know how Chairman Pai will interpret the law, or what rules he’ll set. He might replace them with looser rules that take after the FTC or wait to roll back the Title II interpretation overall. But until he acts, we can’t say for sure what carriers will be allowed to do.
At the same time, the absence of firm rules could be the whole point. Pai is a free-market conservative, and believes that companies will typically find the optimal solution without government interference. Holding off on setting new rules could be right in line with that philosophy, leaving companies to make their own judgments on customer data without fear that they’ll be punished for overstepping FCC guidelines. Unfortunately for privacy-minded consumers, that would leave few legal protections for private data shared with carriers.”
That last line is rather chilling.
What the advertisers want is a land amenable to “granular personalized targeting,” read advertising directed to specific consumers for specific products and services. Those advertisers can just as easily be political groups and organizations.
The final irony is that Our information may be aggregated and sold to the highest bidders, but members of Congress are protected. The ‘yes’ votes may be saying, in essence, “I’ve got my privacy, you try to get yours.”