No such call needed to pack this room with lobbyists from all sides, those who want to see the plan get through—with their own adjustments, of course—and those adamantly opposed. The tough road ahead was signaled quickly by Commerce Chairman Jay Rockefeller, who opened with praise for the “great start” but no endorsement, calling it “long on vision but short on tactics…. Putting ideas on paper is not enough.” Rockefeller also issued an angry response to last week’s federal appeals court decision overturning the FCC’s rules on net neutrality, asking the agency “to use all of its existing authority” to “pursue the broad objectives” of the broadband plan in the near term—and promised to take on the task of rewriting the law if need be.

—One of the many pieces of paper being passed around (there’s a “green” opportunity here) includes a statement on open access from a batch of high-tech companies including Amazon (NSDQ: AMZN), Skype, Sling Media/DISH/EchoStar (NSDQ: SATS), IAC (NSDQ: IACI) (Genachowski’s former employer), EarthLink, and XO supporting the claim that regardless of the court decision, the FCC has the legal authority to implement open Internet rules or the benefit of consumers.”

—Maybe Congress needs to go with the elevator pitch as an opening statement. Even though he took numerous shortcuts through the prepared remarks, it really boiled down to “we like our own plan, we have the authority no matter what the court said, act now.” Rockefeller, playing the role of sympathetic but stern father looking for results, called one of Genachowski’s responses to a question ‘Impressive, almost elegiac. When are we going to see things happen?”

—Sen. Mike Johanns insists the FCC has already said it doesn’t have the authority to enforce net neutrality, reading from the court decision. Not so, insists Genachoswski. JohannW: “I think you’ve been handed your hat by the Comcast (NSDQ: CMCSA) case. ... It’s a situation, I believe, that Congress has not given you the power” to do what you assert with the plan. “You need to work with us.” Work with? Yes. Agree with? Not so much.

—Much of the discussion so far centers on the idea that the FCC can solve at least some of the concerns raised by last week’s court decision by switching broadband from being covered by Title I of the Communications Act to Title II of the act, where it would be subjected to common carrier regulations. As B&C details, that’s not exactly an easy answer. The ISPs, which don’t face some of the constraints on telecom, are strongly opposed and already fighting out loud.

—Sen. Claire McCaskill is fretting over what happens when we get to the end of spectrum—will it only be for people can afford it, like her family, and the rest crowded out?  Genachowski assures her FCC is committed to helping the unconnected. (that’s the broadband version of disenfranchised.)

—Genachowski to Sen. Olympia Snow on protecting access: “Preserving what we’ve had is all we need to do.”

—Second round and Rockefeller comes back to the broadband plan and rural access, recalling watching Verizon techs try to string wires for landlines during the mining disaster last week. “It was really embarrassing, Mr. Chairman,” he said, adding, “I’m not satisfied that you really are taking into consideration rural America. ... Chairman Powell made your life a whole lot more difficult. If you need more, come to us. It may be partisan, it may be close.”

—Johanns cautions Genachowski against switching broadband from information service to telecommunications service.

The message from the Senate: you’re not going to get any relief from us anytime soon; this is DIY—as long as you do it [fill in Senator’s name] way.