STEVENS’ NEW NET NEUTRALITY LANGUAGE MIMICS BARTON BILL
The 3rd draft of a telecom reform bill from Senate Commerce Committee Chmn. Stevens (R-Alaska) addresses net neutrality but doesn’t assuage critics’ fears that network operators like AT&T and Verizon will be able to discriminate against content providers like Google and Amazon.com, sources told us Sat. It goes further than Stevens’ previous draft, which simply required the FCC to conduct a study on the controversial topic. The new version of S-2686 is expected to become public Mon.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
The latest iteration of the draft, which was finalized late Fri. night, states that the FCC should seek to “preserve the free flow of ideas and information on the Internet” and “promote public discourse on the Internet.” The draft acknowledges that a “vibrant and competitive free market” exists for the Internet,” according to a copy of the text obtained by Communications Daily/Washington Internet Daily. Net neutrality backers have argued that the broadband sector lacks competition because most U.S. consumers can only choose between cable and DSL, and many only have one option for high-speed at home.
The draft also encourages “investment and innovation in Internet networks and applications markets through a diversity of business models” and aims to “promote deployment of broadband networks nationwide.” Nowhere in the net neutrality section does the world “discrimination” appear. A spokesman for Public Knowledge (PK) said the bill “still allows network operators to discriminate [and] establish their own little private pipes.”
One portion of S-2686’s “consumer Internet bill of rights” states that subscribers should have access to the Internet without interference from an ISP or any federal, state or local govt., except as authorized by law. The net neutrality provisions in this draft now look a lot more like House Commerce Committee Chmn. Barton’s (R-Tex.) bill (H-5252), which passed earlier this month, the PK spokesman said. The House rejected a strict net neutrality mandate 152-269 (CD/WID June 9, Special Report).
Sens. Snowe (R-Me.) and Dorgan (D-N.D.) planned to introduce their explicit net neutrality measure (S-2917) as an amendment to Stevens’ bill at Thurs.’s scheduled markup if the amended draft didn’t reflect changes consistent with their bill’s goals. S-2917 is backed by Senate Commerce Committee co-Chmn. Inouye (D-Hawaii). Amendments to the telecom bill are due Mon.
The draft also attempts to streamline video franchising laws. A franchising authority is directed to consider a franchise within its area to a video service provider within 90 days after receiving a Commission-approved standard application form. After receiving the application, a public notice would be posted within 15 days if required by state or local law. A franchising agreement would take effect 15 days after the date that the completed franchise application is received by the applicant, unless the terms of the deal are rejected. Franchising agreements would last 5-15 years. The franchise fee imposed for any year-long period may not exceed 5% of the video service provider’s gross revenue during that period. The bill preserves local govt. authority to manage public rights-of-way.
Family Tiers Required
Stevens’ bill calls for cable operators, satellite providers and other multichannel video programming distributors to offer family program tiers free of indecent and obscene programming. Every multichannel distributor is directed to submit an annual report to the FCC on family tiers that includes whether it offers a family tier, the retail price of the tier, a description of the channels included, a description of the distributor’s efforts to market the tier and the subscribership level for every tier and package. After a year, and every year thereafter for 5 years, the Commission would submit a report to Congress aggregating the data it receives on family tiers.
The National Assn. of Regulatory Commissioners (NARUC) said some changes in the draft will have a major impact on its members. There’s language that declares VoIP as purely interstate, with no carve-outs for state core competency oversight, such as consumer protection, a spokesman for the group said. States are also preempted from regulation and adjudication on wireless terms and conditions, NARUC said. State Universal Service Fund (USF) provisions are left generally intact, the group said.
Secret FCC Meetings Allowed
In other news, the draft also permits FCC commissioners to meet in secret as long as no votes are taken. Former Chmn. Michael Powell (R) and Comr. Copps (D) argued last year that existing law hampers communication among members because only 2 at a time can talk face-to-face outside the public meeting room. Commissioners otherwise have to communicate through their staffs, letters and e-mail. Those indirect methods “clearly do not foster frank, open discussion” and are “less efficient than in-person interchange,” Powell and Copps wrote in a letter to Stevens last Feb. Broadcast and audio flag provisions also appear in the legislation. The draft includes expedited proceedings for certifying flag technologies for use in distance education.