A Quote by Cindy Hyde-Smith

I support greater access to the Internet, but going back to Obama-era regulations is not the answer. — © Cindy Hyde-Smith
I support greater access to the Internet, but going back to Obama-era regulations is not the answer.
Some claim that the Obama FCC's regulations are necessary to protect Internet openness. History proves this assertion false. We had a free and open Internet prior to 2015, and we will have a free and open Internet once these regulations are repealed.
We must treat access to the Internet similar to the way we treat access to all of our utilities because in the modern world lack of Internet access means people are held back from advancing economically, and it can even put their own health at risk.
You can go back and rescind an old regulation like Obama era regulations. That was done once in 20 years. We've done 14 of them in law this year alone, because they can't filibuster that.
Stacks of job-killing Executive Orders and regulations from the Obama era need to be repealed or rolled back. At the top of the stack is the Clean Power Plan, which has put tens of thousands of American coal miners out of work.
You have to have access to ideas. The Internet is facilitating that access to ideas. In 25 years, the way that data's going to flow back and forth, we don't quite understand yet.
Dodd-Frank represents the greatest regulatory burden on our economy, more so than all the other Obama-era regulations combined.
Access to science is greater than ever before. There are more vehicles out there that grant the public access to science. Not to mention the Internet.
In the Internet world, both ends essentially pay for access to the Internet system, and so the providers of access get compensated by the users at each end. My big concern is that suddenly access providers want to step in the middle and create a toll road to limit customers' ability to get access to services of their choice even though they have paid for access to the network in the first place.
The hope of Internet anarchists was that repressive governments would have only two options: accept the Internet with its limitless possibilities of spreading information, or restrict Internet access to the ruling elite and turn your back on the 21st century, as North Korea has done.
Google and Facebook extend internet access across the world, but the access is generally speaking to an internet that is focused on the advertisers to those sites.
This new world of personal media - the Web, the Internet and et cetera - not only delivers the world to your living rooms, but everywhere. And we get to answer back. And we're expected to answer back.
We are excited about Internet access in general. With better access to the Internet, people do more searches.
There is no law that guarantees press access to the White House. Communication was lessening during the Obama years. There was every reason to suspect that Trump was going to create an adversarial relationship and that people were going to be faced with the impossible dilemma between sort-of-complicity and access.
One of the reasons the Dawn Wall climb went so viral is that you get great Internet access on El Cap. It's like the best Internet access in all of Yosemite, so we had our phones with us.
An overly expansive virtual 'toll' for the Internet that blocks consumers' and competitors' access to the e-commerce superhighway is not the right answer.
Protect IP (PIPA) and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) are a step towards a different kind of Internet. They are a step towards an Internet in which those with money and lawyers and access to power have a greater voice than those who don't.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!