LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for SCHOOL-IT Archives


SCHOOL-IT Archives

SCHOOL-IT Archives


SCHOOL-IT@LIST.UVM.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

SCHOOL-IT Home

SCHOOL-IT Home

SCHOOL-IT  November 2000

SCHOOL-IT November 2000

Subject:

FW: FCC Data/ERATE/Filtering

From:

Philip Hyjek <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

School Information Technology Discussion <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 1 Nov 2000 12:00:52 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (144 lines)

In case you're interested in what's happening in DC....


FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION RELEASES DATA
ON HIGH-SPEED SERVICES FOR INTERNET ACCESS

Yesterday, the FCC released summary statistics of its latest data on
the deployment of high-speed Internet services in the United States.
The report indicated that high-speed lines connecting homes and small
businesses to the Internet increased by 57 percent during the first half
of 2000, to a total of 4.3 million lines (or wireless channels) in
service from 2.8 million at the end of 1999. About 2.8 million of
high-speed lines provided speeds of over 200 kbps in both directions,
and thus met the FCC's definition of advanced services, compared to 2.0
million at the end of 1999.  High-speed service subscribers was reported
in all states. High-speed asymmetric DSL (ADSL) lines in service
increased by 157 percent, to almost one million lines.  High-speed lines
in service over coaxial cable systems remained more numerous, increasing
59 percent.  High-speed lines (or wireless channels) delivered over
fiber, satellite, fixed wireless, and wireline technologies other than
ADSL increased by at least 18% during the first half of this year. Only
40 percent of the lowest population densities have access to high-speed
networks. See: www.fcc.gov

NOTICES ON E-RATE

The Schools and Libraries Division (SLD/USAC) issued a notice
indicating that November 20, 2000 is the deadline for submitting Billed
Entity Applicant Reimbursement (BEAR) forms and Service Provider
Invoices for Year Two (1999-2000).  Responses that come in after this
deadline will risk an applicants full payment.  Schools and libraries
who received a Year 2 funding commitment are also reminded that Form
486's, the Receipt of Service Confirmation Form, must be filed before
any funds can flow to you or your service provider.  The SLD is in the
process of finalizing a new Eligible Services List with the FCC.   The
SLD notes that it updated this list on October 12, 2000 in an effort to
clarify the eligibility of certain application items; that a number of
items had previously been categorized as Eligible even though there were
conditions on their eligibility.  Such items are now categorized as
Conditional and additional information has been added in BOLD text.  A
new Eligible Services List will be posted to the SLD web site early in
the upcoming Form 471 filing window for Funding Year 4.  That new list
will reflect additional clarifications.  See:
http://www.sl.universalservice.org/

CLINTON, GOP COMPROMISE ON NET FILTERING

Although the government spending bill carrying a clause requiring
Internet filtering on school and library computers that are federally
funded is wrapped up in partisan melees, the White House and Republican
lawmakers appear to have reached common ground on the filtering
question.

If the spending bill passes Congress and is signed into law, it would
mark the dawn of required Internet information-blocking technology in
exchange for federal dollars, which has outraged free speech groups, and
stands in some contrast to a congressional panel's recent
recommendation.

The filtering language is housed in the gigantic Labor and Health and
Human Services Appropriations bill, which still has to receive final
congressional approval before reaching President Clinton. The House has
not yet begun consideration of the legislation after initially
successful compromise negotiations on the conference report broke down
on Monday.

"Nothing's over until it's over, but it seems like everyone's happy,"
said David Crane, a staffer in the Senate Commerce Committee, whose
chairman, John McCain, R-Ariz., sponsored an Internet filtering bill
that was incorporated into the Labor and Health and Human Services
Appropriations bill. "There have been... changes, but the Senate bill
essentially is intact."

A White House spokesperson confirmed that there were talks on arriving
at mandatory Internet filtering language that the administration could
approve, but declined to say whether the agreement is definitive,
especially in light of ongoing battles over the rest of the $350 billion
appropriations bill, including a dispute over ergonomics standards that
may bring about a presidential veto less than a week from Election Day.

Crane said that the Internet language combines elements of McCain's
bill, which requires filtering in exchange for E-Rate dollars, used to
help connect poor and rural public schools and libraries to the
Internet, as well as elements of similar legislation from Sen. Rick
Santorum, R-Pa., and Rep. Ernest Istook, R-Okla.

"Clearly the White House had differences in terms of what they would
like to see as a final product," Crane said, adding that GOP negotiators
satisfied the White House's main objection to the filtering language,
namely that schools and libraries would have to use E-Rate dollars to
pay for the software.

Under the current arrangement, other sources of federal funding could
be set aside to pay for the software, and Crane noted that many ISPs
provide it for free.

He added that Santorum's language in the bill emphasizes local school
and library board control of the filtering process, while McCain's
language aims for technology neutrality, especially in the face of White
House concerns that terms like "filtering" and "blocking" would
encourage one particular type of technology over another for keeping
children away from material generally considered "harmful" or
"obscene."

While there is little question on the Supreme Court definition of
obscene material, "harmful to minors" has seen some strife, as the
American Civil Liberties Union and other groups have argued that there
is little merit to the phrase, and that opinions on what is harmful
differ depending on the community.

Crane characterized that argument as a red herring, saying that 48
states have harmful to minors statutes on the books, and that the ACLU
is "acting like a bunch of bullies" by picking filtering fights in
counties with small legal budgets, and getting district court judges to
ban mandatory filtering.

One of the most notable examples was a case in Loudoun County, Va., in
which the ACLU successfully convinced a judge that the county's library
board could not decide on a common standard for decency on its
libraries, and therefore could not use filtering devices.

"The Loudoun case is bad law," Crane said.

ACLU officials were not immediately available for comment, and other
civil liberties groups did not return telephone calls.

Nevertheless, he added, communities bear the privilege and
responsibility of deciding what kind of material, and how much, to
block.

"The federal government is expressly prohibited from the technology
selection process or the Internet safety process," he said, adding that
the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in the original McCain bill
would keep a repository of information on individual district filtering
decisions, but now would ask for that information only on - likely
infrequent - requests.

The proximity of mandatory Internet blocking technology to legal
authority comes after the Child Online Protection Act (COPA) commission,
chartered by a law (currently frozen in court) banning children from
viewing "harmful" material online, recommended that Congress not impose
mandatory filtering guidelines.  Source: A report by Robert MacMillan,
11/1/00.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LIST.UVM.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager