Sens. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., and Deb Fischer, R-Neb., sent a joint letter (http://bit.ly/1lUprRM) to CBS CEO Les Moonves Wednesday asking about CBS’s rejection of certain American Television Alliance (ATVA) ads in favor of Local Choice, a Senate proposal to which broadcasters object. A CBS Radio spokeswoman has previously confirmed to us that it rejected such ads because they did not meet its broadcast standards. Blumenthal and Fischer asked several questions of Moonves, such as whether CBS provided ATVA with a reason for the denial and what other communications issues for which CBS has refused to run advertisements. “We're very grateful that Sens. Blumenthal and Fischer are looking into this issue on behalf of consumers,” ATVA’s spokesman said. “CBS has the right to disagree with us about the best way to fix retransmission consent but they shouldn’t be stifling the debate. The American public deserves better from those entrusted with our airwaves.” A CBS spokeswoman declined comment.

Rep. Scott Peters, D-Calif., introduced a net neutrality bill Tuesday. HR-5429 is not yet posted online, but would amend the Telecom Act to restore the FCC’s authority “to adopt certain rules relating to preserving the open Internet and to direct the Commission to take all actions necessary to restore to effect vacated portions of such rules,” according to its longer title. It was referred to the House Commerce Committee. No co-sponsors are listed.

Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, told the FCC he wants it to craft net neutrality rules under its Communications Act Title II authority, reclassifying broadband as a telecom service. Several prominent Democrats have backed Title II reclassification (CD Sept 10 p5), which congressional Republicans and industry stakeholders have resisted. “The FCC should protect access to the Internet under a Title II framework, with appropriate forbearance, thereby ensuring greater regulatory and market certainty for users and broadband providers,” King told FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler in a letter Wednesday. “To ensure that the Internet fulfills its promise of being a powerful, open platform for social, political, and economic life, the FCC must adopt a rule against blocking, a bright-line rule against application-specific discrimination, and a rule banning access fees.” Protections should apply at points of interconnection, King said, urging the agency to “abandon its current proposal.” Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., another backer of Title II reclassification, meanwhile, allied himself “in solidarity with netizens everywhere” in participating with online protests in favor of net neutrality rules. (See separate report above in this issue.) His website featured a loading symbol, as did many other sites, as “a harbinger of the dark days ahead if we let the broadband behemoths win,” Markey said on the Senate floor Wednesday. “Net neutrality is as basic to the functioning of the Internet as nondiscrimination is to the United States Constitution.”

House lawmakers approved the Anti-Spoofing Act (HR-3670) Tuesday and were planning to consider the E-Label Act (HR-5161) Wednesday, both under suspension of the rules. Suspension is reserved for noncontroversial legislation and requires a two-thirds vote. The House Commerce Committee approved both pieces of legislation earlier this year. The Anti-Spoofing Act would update the Truth in Caller ID Act of 2009 and the E-Label Act would allow electronics manufacturers to provide an FCC-required label digitally rather than on the physical device. “Scammers are using technology to work around an outdated law,” said Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, in a statement after passage of the Anti-Spoofing Act, which he backed. “The practice of spoofing needs to be stopped! This bill will broaden protections for consumers by holding spoofing companies outside the US accountable, stopping abusers from using text messages, and including IP-enabled voice services.”

House lawmakers were poised to vote on the Anti-Spoofing Act (HR-3670) and the E-Label Act (HR-5161) Tuesday under suspension of the rules. Suspension is reserved for noncontroversial legislation and requires a two-thirds vote. Both measures cleared the House Commerce Committee this summer. Final votes were scheduled for between 5 and 6 p.m. Tuesday. The Anti-Spoofing Act would update the Truth in Caller ID Act of 2009 and the E-Label Act would let electronics manufacturers provide an FCC-required label digitally rather than on the physical device.

The Senate Commerce Consumer Protection Subcommittee may hold a hearing investigating pay-TV industry billing practices before the end of the year, Chairman Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., told us at the Capitol Tuesday. “Not before the end of this work period, but we're meeting next week to see what meetings we'll have in November and December,” she said. “I don’t know if [that possible hearing] will get in that [November-December] group, but I think it might. … I can’t give you a firm answer, but I'll know better next week.” Some members of the Commerce Committee were still reviewing the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act reauthorization bill that Commerce Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., and ranking member John Thune, R-S.D., circulated Friday and plan to mark up next week (CD Sept 8 p1). Despite broadcaster attacks on the proposal’s Local Choice and retransmission consent overhaul components, Thune defended the STELA reauthorization, known as the Satellite Television Access and Viewer Rights Act, to reporters at the Capitol. “We'll see what kind of traction it gets in the House,” Thune said. Communications Subcommittee ranking member Roger Wicker, R-Miss., was not prepared to speak to STAVRA’s details. “I'm going to get a briefing on that this afternoon,” Wicker told us. McCaskill has said she plans to introduce a bill addressing her pay-TV industry billing concerns and did not rule out attaching it to STAVRA. “It depends,” McCaskill said. “I haven’t had a chance to look at STELA but these are really tough issues, and the question is, will the chairman and the ranking member … have the votes to get it out of committee on a bipartisan basis? The issue is not what is in the STELA draft that’s been released; the issue is, can we pass it? Or should we pass it?”

Coalitions representing pay-TV companies and broadcasters took out new ads in Washington on Local Choice, the Senate proposal that would overhaul retransmission consent rules to end TV blackouts. Broadcasters have opposed the idea and said they're unfairly singled out. The American Television Alliance (ATVA), representing some pay-TV providers, has widely advertised in favor of the proposal and offered a Tuesday advertisement in Politico telling people they “could be next” in facing TV blackouts (http://bit.ly/1uupDrd). TVFreedom, representing broadcasters, featured advertising in the National Journal blasting Local Choice and telling people to contact their senators saying “no new fees for local TV.” (TVFreedom has also purchased advertising in Communications Daily.) TVFreedom’s spokesman cited statements from pay-TV industry stakeholders opposing an a la carte model being used more widely in the video market, placed in an op-ed for The Hill Tuesday. “The contortions taken by certain members of the cable and satellite TV industry to achieve that advantage reflect a flip-flop of Olympic proportion,” the TVFreedom spokesman said of pay-TV backing for Local Choice (http://bit.ly/1tHHJbw). “The naked truth is that such hypocrisy can only be rationally explained by the cable and satellite lobby desire to drive local TV stations off the air.” Some TVFreedom members -- The Hispanic Institute, National Association of Black Owned Broadcasters, the National Black Religious Broadcasters and the Rural Agriculture Council of America -- sent individual letters to Senate Commerce protesting Local Choice. Public Knowledge, an ATVA member, in a blog post Tuesday partially endorsed Local Choice but cautioned it will be tricky and that Congress should be ready for unpredictable effects of Local Choice on billing and make sure viewers get any savings. “While there are inevitable complicated details, in broad strokes Local Choice is the beginning of a great idea for TV viewers and, if adjusted appropriately to protect consumers, a significant step toward video reform,” Public Knowledge Senior Staff Attorney John Bergmayer said (http://bit.ly/1xEMKE8). Charter, a member of ATVA, praised Senate Commerce Committee leadership for including Local Choice in their Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act reauthorization legislation, set for markup consideration next week. “The current retransmission consent regime is broken, and the Senators’ legislative proposal offers a clear and simple fix,” Charter said in a statement Monday (http://bit.ly/1p3aGXF). “Stopping broadcast blackouts and increasing consumer control is a logical path forward.” Charter called the reauthorization bill “thoughtful.” Other ATVA members such as the American Cable Association and Dish have also issued statements praising the STELA reauthorization bill since its circulation Friday.

The House Judiciary Committee will mark up a bill Wednesday to harmonize the antitrust standards and processes between the FTC and Department of Justice, said a Tuesday news release (http://1.usa.gov/1CO8Ow8). Rep. Blake Farenthold, R-Texas, introduced Tuesday the Standard Merger and Acquisition Reviews Through Equal Rules Act (HR-5402), or SMARTER Act, which would “ensure that parties to a proposed merger receive the same treatment regardless of whether the FTC or the DOJ reviews the transaction,” Farenthold said. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., supported the bill in a statement: “One of the responsibilities of the Judiciary Committee is to ensure fairness and consistency in the enforcement of our nation’s antitrust laws. The Smarter Act is a commonsense measure that reduces disparities in the merger review process."

Local Choice received more heat after the Senate Commerce Committee leadership’s decision to include it in their Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act reauthorization bill (CD Sept 8 p1). Economists Kevin Caves and Hal Singer wrote a letter Monday (http://bit.ly/1weizzd) to committee leaders saying Local Choice, which would overhaul retransmission consent rules to end TV blackouts, “would likely harm cable customers by raising the price of their cable bills.” The letterhead is marked Economists Inc., a company with clients including ABC, CBS, Comcast and many others. NAB asked Singer to write the letter, he told us. Local Choice “singles out the content creators that appeal to the broadest swath of American households for discriminatory treatment,” Caves and Singer said of the broadcast a la carte proposal. “If broadcasters are forced to accept narrower distribution on the cable lineup, the odds are that the license fees for broadcast networks would increase, perversely leading to higher cable bills for the majority of Americans.” A footnote to the letter mentioned that NAB had commissioned the economists to conduct a study recently on sharing agreements and advertising but that “opinions expressed here are our own.” Ad groups also blasted Local Choice on substance and process. “We are in strong opposition to the proposal,” Association of National Advertisers Executive Vice President-Government Relations Dan Jaffe told us, saying his group and the American Association of Advertising Agencies and the American Advertising Federation were sending a joint letter to the committee (http://bit.ly/1ArNF70). Local Choice is “clearly premature” and “not an insignificant step,” likely to hurt advertisers, broadcasters and consumers, Jaffe said. “[Committee staff] have not reached out to us at all.” But Rep. Bob Latta, R-Ohio, said the Senate Commerce Committee legislation “marks an important step forward in advancing this must-pass legislation that will ensure uninterrupted access to broadcast television programming for more than one million satellite television subscribers.” Communications Subcommittee Vice Chairman Latta praised the Satellite Television Access and Viewer Rights Act for including “a provision to eliminate the [set-top box] integration ban, similar to the one I sponsored in the House, and I look forward to a conference committee to work out the differences between the House and Senate bills,” he said in a statement Monday (http://1.usa.gov/1s5klm0).

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., defended the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (S-2588), in a letter to the editor published Sunday that responded to a Los Angeles Times editorial criticizing the bill (http://lat.ms/1urOGv2). The Times’ editorial board had said last week that S-2588, commonly referred to as CISA, would give federal agencies too much access to personally identifiable information when the agencies “that could use it for too many purposes beyond cybersecurity” (http://lat.ms/1wdFWsQ). Many civil liberties groups have been raising similar concerns about privacy aspects of S-2588 for months (CD June 26 p8). Feinstein, who authored S-2588 with committee Vice Chairman Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., said S-2588 has “numerous privacy protections” and is “just the first step toward stronger cybersecurity.” Previous legislation “did not strike the balance between information sharing and privacy and therefore failed to win both Republican and Democratic support,” considered essential to Senate passage of a bill, Feinstein said.