@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ Date: Thu, 21 Dec 1995 From: "Craig A. Johnson" <•••@••.•••> To: Multiple recipients of list <•••@••.•••> Subject: Re: TPR Meeting Cancellation (?) On 21 Dec 95 at 9:23, William J. Drake wrote: > > Emily, folks, > > While I'm new to town and TPR, I would suggest that with the > Communications Consolidation Act winging its way out of the > conference committee and toward passage, I can't imagine a *worse* > time to cancel a TPR meeting. People have been working to > improve/oppose this stinker for years, so it hardly seems right to > bag the meeting because of our holiday schedules and let its passage > go unnoted. Shouldn't we be talking, concretely, about how to > respond? I agree with Bill on this one. But don't assume there will be a bill reported out of committee and voted upon by the time of the meeting, regardless of what you read in the papers this am. As Pressler said today, there is only a "framework for an agreement" in place, and the House Republicans (with the exception of Bliley who was ready to file the conf. report and vote) have balked, and it appears as if there will be a new round of scuffling. People ought to look over the 46 recommendations by the staff, which can be found on the ACC web page http://www.bell.com. The media concentration issues and the telco entry into long distance are still up in the air. All indications are that both the conferees and the Administration intend to throttle the Internet as planned with the odious "indecency" standard. The "wiggle room" on that seems to have completely disappeared. I would sure like to understand why the White House could not have confronted that issue more directly. It's not as if the Constitution is unimportant, I assume. Craig Craig A. Johnson ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Telecommunications/Information Policy Specialist Transnational Data Reporting Service, Inc. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ •••@••.••• @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ Date: Fri, 22 Dec 1995 From: Joe Shea <•••@••.•••> Subject: Censorship Update The following note from our attorney will update you on the current status of the legislation and our case. If the Post story turns out not to be true, we will be ready to go anyway. Merry Christmas, everyone! Best, Joe Shea Editor-in-Chief The American Reporter •••@••.••• http://www.newshare.com/Reporter/today.html ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 22 Dec 1995 08:04:53 -0800 From: Randall Boe <•••@••.•••> To: •••@••.••• Subject: Update Joe-- Sorry that I missed your call last night. The Washington Post ran an article this morning detailing the blow-up on the Telecom bill. Apparently, the Republican leadership is all bent out of shape because Gore praised the bill on Wednesday night. I have one of our legislative people tracking it and the word I'm hearing this morning is that there may not be further action until after the New Year. In any event, you are correct about the strategy--my concern is picking a favorable venue. The D.C. Circuit has become very conservative and has disposed of First Amendment cases with a fair amount of hostility---in addition, there are decisions out of the D.C. Circuit that are not helpful. The ACLU is thinking about Philadeplhia--which might not be bad. I was thinking about Boston or somewhere else in the First Ciirucit (the American Virgin Islands??) as a possibility. I'm working on the complaint--and injunction papers. In the meantime, have a Merry Christmas. Randall Boe Arent Fox Kintner Plotkin & Kahn •••@••.••• @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ ~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~--~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~ Posted by Richard K. Moore (•••@••.•••) Wexford, Ireland Cyber-Rights: http://www.cpsr.org/cpsr/nii/cyber-rights/ CyberLib: http://www.internet-eireann.ie/cyberlib ** NOTE ** Temporarily submit postings to •••@••.••• ~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~--~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~
