Event

This afternoon, the United States Senate voted 60-39 on the motion to invoke cloture on HR 2847, Commerce, Justice, Science Appropriations bill, rejecting the harmful amendment proposed by Senators Vitter (R-LA) and Bennett (R-UT).  NDN, along with 20 other leading advocacy organizations worked relentlessly over the past weeks to defeat this divisive amendment.  The Vitter-Bennett amendment would have irresponsibly disrupted the census next year and threatened the accuracy of the national reapportionment process in the years that follow.

Today's important vote would not have been possible without Harry Reid's strong leadership and commitment to justice.  NDN would also like to thank the strong coalition of advocacy groups that joined together to lead this effort.

Andres Ramirez, Senior Vice President at NDN and a leading voice in this debate said, "The Vitter-Bennett Amendment would have irresponsibility disrupted the census process next year.  We are proud of Senator Reid and the Senate for voting it down.  It is now much more likely that we have a clean and accurate census count next year."

Simon Rosenberg, President of NDN, said "I want to thank the 60 Senators who voted for cloture today, and for the dozens of groups who worked so far to defeat this irresponsible amendment. There is no doubt that if it had passed it would have disrupted the census next year, and reapportionment the years after.  I don't think this fight is over but this was an important victory for common sense and good government today."

For more information, follow this link to NDN's backgrounder on Census 2010, Immigration and Reapportionment.

Happy Friday!  For those of you that have been following the Vitter-Bennett amendment discussions, we wanted to make sure you knew about another forum for information: Don't Wreck The Census

We have partnered with this site in order to provide another excellent resource for up to date information surrounding the census debate.  On it, you will also find resources that allow you to take action by calling or writing your representative.  Click here to tell your representatives to vote NO on the Vitter-Bennett amendment.

Last week, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski held a hearing to introduce a new set of rules intended to preserve the free and open internet and to start a public discourse regarding whether or not they will be formally adopted.  To be clear, this post is not meant to support or oppose the rules themselves; rather, to comment on the nature of the discourse in its inception stages.

As dialogue surrounding FCC regulations on net neutrality becomes an issue with increasing visibility, so does the importance for each voice to be heard.  Like America, the Internet was created "for the people, by the people," so why would anyone try to silence the people?

By undermining the voices of eminent minority groups like the NAACP and the NCLR, Art Brodsky, the Communications Director at Public Knowledge (PK) is doing just that.  A comment on his blog post suggested that

"...the saddest part of the whole affair to date is the role of groups representing minority populations. For whatever reason - whether they believe what the Big Telecom companies tell them or not - many organizations seem to land on policies that hurt their constituencies and fall into ludicrous traps one suspects are not of their making."

His sentiment implies that well-respected organizations known for their century long fight for equal rights may be duped into a "trap" based on their so-called loyalty to "Big Telecom companies."  At worst, Mr. Brodsky is trying to silence strong civil rights organizations.  At best, his condescending commentary intends to devalue their intentions, research, and history.

After Mr. Brodsky posted his comments last week, Sylvia Aguilera, Executive Director of the Hispanic Technology and Telecommunications Partnership (HTTP) responded in a letter by demanding that PK "immediately repudiate the damaging statements."   Now, PK has linked the minority groups' positioning to loyalty based on monetary contributions - effectively suggesting that they are being bribed into taking their stance.  It would be naïve to think that operations of this sort never happen, but it is presumptuous and demeaning to suggest that money is the only factor on which their stance is based.

NDN has a history of partnering with organizations such as the NAACP and NCLR on a variety of issues, including the recent debate on the Vitter-Bennett amendment regarding the census.  Therefore, we can attest to their sincerity and leadership in advocating for their respective communities' interests.

For someone that advocates an open source platform as Mr. Brodsky claims to by supporting net neutrality, it seems ironic that he would try to silence the developing discourse on this topic.