Large Array of Amendments Awaits Senate Telecom Bill Markup

Despite Stevens’ stab at compromise with his latest version, the committee expected an avalanche of amendments. Some may be worked into the Stevens’ own amendment package, and others will be heard separately during the lengthy markup. Several committee members’ staffers told us they heard rumors of as many as 250 amendments, but the official tally was probably closer to 220. The House voted 321-101 to approve a companion measure to set video franchising rules for cable competitors, but rejected a strict net neutrality provision. Sens. Snowe (R-Me.) and Dorgan (D-N.D.) drafted language similar to the failed House proposal and plan to introduce it as an amendment to Stevens’ bill, aides said.

Stevens’ draft initially called only for an FCC study on net neutrality, but his new version contains a “consumer Internet bill of rights.” The section says subscribers should have access to the Web without interference from an ISP or any federal, state or local govt., except as authorized by law (CD June 17 Special Report). Critics have complained that language doesn’t go far enough to prevent possible telco and cable discrimination against online content providers. The House-approved net neutrality measure clarified that antidiscrimination complaints are subject to antitrust laws even though the FCC is the main arbiter.

Bountiful Amendments, Broad Topics

Committee co-Chmn. Inouye (D-Hawaii) filed 33 proposed amendments, a spokesman told us. While some amendments dealt with technical corrections, his main focus is on the 4 core areas where he believes the bill is inadequate -- net neutrality, franchising, interconnection and special access - - the spokesman said.

Inquiries to key senators’ offices turned up only a handful who were willing to preview amendments they planned to offer. Commerce Committee staffers were tightlipped about the contents of the manager’s amendment. A spokesman said the committee doesn’t comment on ongoing negotiations.

Sen. Burns (R-Mont.) planned to introduce several amendments. One would drastically increase fines for Internet providers’ failure to report child porn on their pipeline and another would require warning labels for websites that depict sexually explicit material. Sens. Burns and Kyl (R-Ariz.) introduced a bill to the same effect -- the Internet Stop Adults Facilitating the Exploitation of Youth (SAFETY) Act (S-4399) earlier this month. The measure, which had the same name as one reportedly considered, then dropped by House Judiciary Committee Chmn. Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) got a chilly reception by Internet advocates who said labeling provisions simply wouldn’t work.

Another anticipated Burns amendment would require the FCC to initiate a proceeding no later than Feb. 1 to reevaluate and reconfigure plans for the remaining upper and lower 700 MHz spectrum bands, which will be auctioned to wireless service providers, a spokesman told us. The FCC’s current plan divides all 60 MHz of unauctioned spectrum into large geographic licenses, each covering about 1/6 of the U.S. The Stevens draft requires the Commission to reconfigure the band plans to include licenses covering smaller areas.

A likely Burns-Dorgan amendment would preserve existing state authority on consumer protection and intercarrier compensation relating to VoIP. A separate provision from Burns would improve public safety by requiring that allocated grant funds may be used for IP-enabled public safety systems. As currently written, 2004’s ENHANCE 911 Act limits grant- making and makes it difficult for communities to migrate to an IP-based E-911 system, a spokesman said.

An amendment to expand access to wireless and wireless broadband service in underserved areas through buildout credits and smaller licensing areas for auctioned spectrum is also anticipated from Burns. The amendment would establish ongoing reports to Congress on spectrum ownership and usage, which will guide lawmakers in future policy on spectrum- related decisions, a spokesman said.

Sen. Nelson (D-Fla.) filed more than 22 amendments, a spokesman told us. Some were technical fixes while others were more sweeping. One, cosponsored by Sen. Snowe (R-Me.) would create an independent Office of the Consumer Advocate at the FCC. Another, offered with Sen. McCain (R-Ariz.), would require ISPs to give 911 and E-911 the highest priority and quality of service. A 3rd is aimed at protecting broadcasters and consumers during the DTV transition by strengthening the Stevens draft’s DTV outreach plan and harmonizing it with DTV provisions and converter box subsidies in last year’s budget reconciliation act. Other amendments filed with various cosponsors would: Prevent caller ID spoofing; ensure that the DTV transition is equitable to disabled Americans; require the FCC to report “more helpful broadband adoption statistics;” mandate an FCC study on telemedicine; scale back “overly broad” VoIP preemption in the underlying bill.

Amendments expected from Sen. Allen (R-Va.) are equally diverse. An Internet tax freedom provision would make permanent the moratorium on Web access taxes that’s set to expire next year. Extending the moratorium would promote broadband deployment and penetration, a spokesman told us. Another amendment would addresses the current draft’s decision to let the FCC determine the definition of a facilities-based VoIP provider. Allen wants the bill to define “facilities-based.” “The language is limited to where a provider has a facility or point of presence within a defined geographic area,” his spokesman said.

Allen also planned to make a pitch for requiring collection of compensation from Internet phone companies, which would reimburse carriers when they complete calls from callers outside their network. When a VoIP provider completes a call from an incumbent carrier’s network, the bill doesn’t clearly entitle them to receive similar compensation, Allen’s spokesman said. “This is unfair and inequitable as it only requires payment in one direction,” he said: “The amendment would ensure that as Congress requires Internet phone providers to pay in one direction to make calls, those same providers get paid when they complete calls for other phone companies.”

Truth in billing for wireless companies will be Sen. Rockefeller’s (D-W.Va.) main concern at the markup. He'll introduce a series of amendments, including a “bill of rights for wireless consumers,” a spokesman told us. In many areas of the country, like the Mountain State, “wireless service leaves a lot to be desired, yet there are all kinds of charges being stacked on top of each other,” he said. Rockefeller’s amendment would require wireless firms to provide “clear, accurate and understandable” bills. Currently, line-item fees for “regulatory compliance” are generally not included in the advertised service price. This leads to consumer confusion and can impede consumers’ ability to compare the cost of service by different carriers, the amendment text said.

Rockefeller is also worried about language in the Stevens draft pertaining to preemption of state wireless regulation, his spokesman told us. States that have strong Public Service Commissions and “state laws that are good” need to be protected from overarching federal mandates, he said. His wireless amendment will include a section saying the telecom bill “shall not preempt any state laws that provide additional protection to subscribers of wireless telephone service.”

Sen. Kerry (D-Mass.) will support net neutrality, but he will not offer his own amendment on the issue, an aide told us. He will vote in favor of the Snowe-Dorgan amendment and “any other proposals seeking to keep the Internet free and open,” the aide said. On the broadband buildout requirement, Kerry is working with colleagues “to ensure that all Americans enjoy the advantages of cable TV and high-speed Internet.”

He reportedly filed a joint amendment with Sen. Boxer (D-Cal.) to require that companies build out their broadband networks, the aide said. Under current law, cable operators must offer their services throughout entire franchise areas and the Stevens draft eliminates that requirement, the aide said. Kerry and Boxer think the Senate “should not legalize cherry-picking of cable service providers and new entrants, leaving some communities with inferior service, higher cable rates and even the loss of service,” the staffer said.

Chmn. Stevens has the wherewithal to keep the telecom bill on track but “it’s certainly possible that the sheer number of amendments may cause a delay in the markup,” Stanford Washington Research Group analyst Paul Gallant told us: “Mathematically, you have to be prepared for the possibility.” Explaining each amendment and voting on it could take many hours, he said. Stifel Nicolaus analyst Blair Levin agreed, saying the battle to get the bill to President Bush’s desk during the 109th Congress is “still uphill.”

“The number of amendments may be staggering and a pain, but this reflects an effort by a lot of people to weigh in on important issues,” Rockefeller’s spokesman said. It represents a “serious effort” by lawmakers to update the 1996 Telecom Act to keep up with advances in the communications infrastructure, he said.