State Democrats Revive Net Neutrality Bills in Busy First Month

States with net neutrality bills this year include Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, South Carolina and West Virginia. Democrats, who tend to favor such bills against GOP resistance, control both legislative chambers and the governor’s office in Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, New York and Rhode Island.

Lawmakers are floating bills even in states where politics haven’t changed much from last year. In Maryland, Democrats maintained a veto-proof House majority, but their Senate control narrowed by one seat and Gov. Larry Hogan (R) won re-election. “I can't predict what the Senate or Governor Hogan will do,” emailed Maryland Del. Kirill Reznik (D), who Monday resurrected a combined net neutrality and ISP privacy bill (HB-141) that last year cleared the House but stalled in the Senate (see 1804130040). “All I can do” is “work to get it passed,” focusing first on the House, Reznik said. The measure “is extremely common sense and does not go as far as either California or Washington” state, he added.

Those two states last year enacted comprehensive rules, while Oregon and Vermont limited procurement. Montana, New York, New Jersey, Hawaii, Rhode Island and Vermont have executive orders that similarly limit state contracts. DOJ sued California, while USTelecom and other industry groups sued California and Vermont. California froze enforcement of its law while litigation against the FCC is pending, which put litigation against the state on hold (see 1810260045).

This year’s bills “are typical of what we saw last year” except New Jersey, which has a proposal (AB-2131) to bar municipalities from granting access to poles if the provider doesn’t adhere to net neutrality rules, said American Legislative Exchange Council Communications and Technology Task Force Director Jonathon Hauenschild. Such a measure may be pre-empted by the FCC’s August order pre-empting state and local rules that effectively prevent broadband deployment, he said. New Jersey’s bill is novel, though Hawaii had a similar bill last year, said National Regulatory Research Institute Senior Research Associate Kathryn Kline.

States should keep tabs on litigation in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, said Public Knowledge Vice President Chris Lewis. That’s why California paused enforcement of its law, he said. If the court overturns the FCC decision rescinding the 2015 rules, “then the challenge to the California law is a moot point,” Lewis said. Hauenschild doesn’t foresee much movement on state bills until the D.C. Circuit rules, or toward the end of sessions if courts haven’t yet resolved the issue, he said.

“The prospect of litigation should not deter a state from enacting net neutrality laws,” said Null. “There are strong arguments that states have the authority to pass these laws.” An FCC spokesperson couldn’t comment due to the shutdown.

“USTelecom will continue to oppose efforts by individual states to regulate the internet," a spokesperson said. "Broadband providers are united in support of uniform, national, and enforceable open internet protections and committed to delivering the content and services consumers demand. Rather than 50 states stepping in with their own conflicting open internet solutions, we need Congress to step up with a national framework and resolve this issue once and for all."

State Bills

New York state Sen. Brad Hoylman (D) plans soon to reintroduce his net neutrality bill proposing comprehensive rules like the California law, a spokesperson said. A Democratic flip of the state Senate to gain a trifecta will help the bill’s chances, Hoylman said earlier (see 1811070043). Other state lawmakers proposed restricting state procurement to ISPs that follow net neutrality in the proposed state budget (A-2008 and S-1508) and in a stand-alone bill (A-138).

Keep an eye on Connecticut, which got close to passing a bill last year, said Kline. Democrats this year took control of Connecticut's Senate and that party's Ned Lamont won the governor’s race. Last year’s bill failed with the Senate split and Dannel Malloy (D) as governor. Political stars also seem aligned to pass a bill in Colorado (see 1812280020).

Democrats in two New England states with GOP governors recently floated bills. Massachusetts Senate Majority Leader Cynthia Creem (D) introduced SD-603, reviving her proposal that last year passed the Senate, to grade ISPs on privacy and net neutrality. Sen. James Eldridge (D) floated an alternative measure (SD-1871) to require ISPs to adhere to net neutrality rules and ban state contracts with those that don’t. In November, Democrats kept veto-proof majorities in both Massachusetts chambers, while Gov. Charlie Baker (R) won re-election.

A New Hampshire House panel this week weighed a bill (HB-132) that would ban state contracts with ISPs that don’t follow net neutrality rules and direct the attorney general to review if ISP net management practices comply with the FCC’s 2015 open internet rules. The House Science, Technology and Energy Committee didn’t vote Tuesday on the bill that’s co-sponsored by a Republican. Democrats flipped the House and Senate in November, but the state still has a Republican executive in Gov. Chris Sununu.

Democratic bills are surfacing in some GOP-dominated states. Four Minnesota lawmakers Tuesday introduced Democrats’ third net neutrality bill (SF-317) in the state where Republicans control both legislative chambers. It’s similar to SF-209 and the House’s HF-136. State Rep. Matt Sain (D) that day proposed net neutrality rules (HB-625) in Missouri, where the GOP has a trifecta.