When I saw Timothy Karr's fine diary on the fight to keep Net Neutrality, I couldn't help but write about my area's Taliban congressman who, like everything else he does, is in favor of big business and against average folks like me.
Pete Sessions' love affair with big business doesn't stop with his failure to oppose next-door congressman Joe Barton's apology to BP. It also includes this statement opposing Net Neutrality.
More below.
Here's part of what Sessions says:
Net neutrality would usurp power from the private sector telecommunication industries—which must invest heavily in broadband infrastructure—and take away their ability to control their own networks.
I oppose net neutrality because it would stifle innovation, reduce incentives for investment, and increase costs for consumers. If there is a debate to be had on net neutrality, it should take place on the floor of the House of Representatives—not unilaterally imposed by bureaucrats at the FCC.
Controlling networks, Pete? As in opposing the ability of folks to express their views on the Internet?
Seems like Pete's views are right out of the handbook of the most suppressive regimes this world has ever known when it comes to quelling the expressions of opposition figures.
Folks in this district asked Pete to represent their interests, not be a lap dog for big business or big donors. By his failure to criticize Barton's apology to BP, he has placed himself on the side of those who brought out the worst environmental catastrophe this nation has ever seen.
And by his opposition to Net Neutrality, Sessions has once again taken the stand that big business knows best and the public be damned.
This joker of a congressman must be defeated.
Here's the site of Sessions' Democratic opponent: http://www.raggioforcongress.com .