Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., praised the Department of Transportation for its work developing a proposed rulemaking to ban in-flight phone calls. “I'm glad the Department of Transportation is serious about putting the brakes on a bad idea before it takes flight,” Alexander said in a statement Monday (http://1.usa.gov/1tG9IFT). “Banning in-flight cell phone conversations would bring us one step closer to avoiding something that the two million passengers flying each day do not want: to be trapped by a seatbelt in 17-inch-wide seats thousands of feet above the ground listening to the same thing we hear in airports -- arguments with spouses, next week’s schedule, or last night’s love life.” Alexander had introduced legislation to ban in-flight calls late last year following the FCC’s announcement it would address the issue.

House Republicans want input on the USF as part of their fifth white paper on overhauling the Communications Act. Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton, R-Mich., and Communications Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore., issued the four-page document Friday, requesting responses by Sept. 19. “As a partnership between the federal and state governments, and funded by ratepayers, it is essential that we review and ensure the effectiveness of this $8 billion per year program as part of our #CommActUpdate process,” Upton and Walden said in a joint statement. “As technologies have been improved and networks upgraded, we have a responsibility to review the program to find out if the fund is still serving its purpose and if there may be better ways to accomplish its goals.” The paper asked eight questions about the nature of the fund and how the federal government manages the fund’s goals. It asked for input on what the proper state role should be as well as the USF’s role during and after the IP transition. “Are current programs at other federal agencies, like the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (which oversaw the Broadband Technology Opportunities Program) or the Rural Utility Service (which oversees lending programs and oversaw the Broadband Initiatives Program) necessary?” the white paper asked (http://1.usa.gov/1pmX66c). “How should our policies address the existence of multiple privately funded networks in many parts of the country that currently receive support?

It’s time to rebrand net neutrality, said House Communications Subcommittee ranking member Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., Thursday. She launched a competition to allow people to propose a new phrase for the concept on reddit, where people can vote for or against responses (http://bit.ly/1ABvoq3). The term is “ambiguous” and “misused and abused in this debate,” Eshoo said in a video announcing the contest (http://bit.ly/1rouI6k): “The ISPs that stand to benefit from this at the expense of consumers like it that way.” She attacked the FCC’s current proposal under consideration, saying it “could split the flow of online traffic into tiers by offering priority treatment to big online corporations that offer higher fees to broadband providers” and lamented that “most Americans have one or two ISPs available to them, so they'd be forced to accept a broadband provider’s decision to prioritize certain websites over others under the proposed FCC rules.” The FCC has defended its net neutrality rulemaking and tried to push back against the notion that any final plan would allow paid prioritization deals. On reddit, Eshoo said she wants to bring clarity and that the most popular entry will win on Sept. 8, also warning against the use of “vulgar or otherwise inappropriate language.” The reddit post soon amassed well over 1,000 comments. “Internet Independence,” one user suggested. “Net Equality,” another proposed. Others insisted the name is fine. Free Press Senior Director-Strategy Tim Karr also countered the idea, writing on the reddit thread: “How about: Net Neutrality.”

Rep. Mike Doyle, D-Pa., welcomed the FCC’s move to collect special access data (CD Aug 19 p2). “Collection and analysis of this data will allow the FCC to determine whether special access markets are competitively priced,” Doyle said in a statement Thursday. “If it turns out that telecom giants are taking advantage of deregulated markets and gouging consumers, many of which are small businesses, the FCC should take action to stop them."

The Senate Commerce Committee plans to mark up Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act (STELA) reauthorization legislation Sept. 17, industry officials told us this week. That legislation, a joint effort of Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., and ranking member John Thune, R-S.D., has not yet been released. Speculation has been rampant that Rockefeller may attach portions of legislation he introduced last fall that would seek to bring parity to online video distributors. Rockefeller and Thune have also floated a discussion draft called Local Choice (CD Aug 13 p4), intended to end TV blackouts and appropriate for inclusion in STELA, they say. Rockefeller and Thune have said they want to tackle STELA in September. Committee spokespeople did not comment Thursday on whether Sept. 17 is, in fact, the markup date.

Members of the Congressional Black Caucus urged the FCC to suspend its proposal to repeal the sports blackout rule. The current system “works well, especially for fans that rely on broadcast television,” CBC members said in a letter to the FCC. The letter was sent Wednesday by 13 members, including Reps. Marcia Fudge, D-Ohio, Bobby Rush, D-Ill., and Frederica Wilson, D-Fla. They're concerned about changes to broadcast rules that may negatively affect their constituents “and potentially reduce the availability or quality of television programming they can access,” the members said. Without the rule, cable- and satellite-TV providers would potentially be able to undermine contractual agreements between pro sports leagues and broadcast networks “that both support attendance at games and improve the viewing experience for fans in the stadium, as well as those watching at home,” they said. Some FCC members would like to act on the sports blackout rule proceeding soon (CD Aug 4 p6).

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) launched a petition Wednesday aimed at Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden, D-Ore., seeking transparency for the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations (TPP) (http://bit.ly/1tmEhjK). EFF listed several provisions for TPP proposals, including “ongoing access to negotiating texts by all Congress members and their staff with proper security clearance and timely public release of concluded provisions following each round of negotiations,” it said. “We stand opposed to any new version of trade authority that does not include these critical guarantees of transparency, inclusiveness and accountability,” said the petition. EFF has criticized the certification stance of the U.S. government in TPP negotiations (CD Aug 15 p9). The petition had more than 450 signatures at our deadline.

Verizon touted its response to Congress on the question of interconnection policy (CD Aug 20 p9). “Flexibility, innovation, investment, and competition should underpin Congress’s approach to competition policy generally, and network interconnection specifically,” Verizon lobbyist Peter Davidson wrote in a blog post Wednesday (http://vz.to/1w9WGF2), linking to full comments the company submitted to the House Communications Subcommittee. He said the regulatory backstops that some have suggested should guide interconnection agreements “should kick in only if and when there is demonstrable consumer harm. It should also be federal in nature; state-based regulation would result in myriad disputes that are resolved not by speedy technical experts, but by 50 different public utility regulators with varying ideas about what is appropriate.” He called the current model of IP interconnection very successful. The subcommittee had solicited feedback last month, framed as part of its effort to overhaul the Communications Act, and had set a comments deadline for early August. It recently posted all 44 responses online.

Far fewer stakeholders weighed in to Congress on the topic of interconnection policy than on the previous three white papers House Republicans had issued to solicit feedback on an effort to overhaul the Communications Act. Responses to the July interconnection white paper were due earlier this month. The House Communications Subcommittee posted the 44 responses online recently (http://1.usa.gov/1pHdC0v); the previous three white papers produced an average of 85 responses per white paper, said Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore., at an event last month (CD July 17 p17). In the latest responses, NASUCA told Congress to “maintain the interconnection obligations set forth in the 1996 Telecom Act” and to maintain the state role. Public Knowledge argued that “policymakers must also retain authority to ensure interconnection agreements are not being used to stifle competition or diminish service in hard-to-reach rural areas” and that state regulators “should also be able to collect information about interconnection agreements and ensure interconnection disputes do not harm consumers or competition.” The American Cable Association backs interconnection obligations of sections 201 and 251, which “recognize the key need to interconnect to further the public interest, provide for additional oversight of networks providers with market power, and enable deregulation where market power no longer exists,” in addition to granting state regulators “an important role where negotiations between incumbents and competitors break down.” The Competitive Carriers Association judged that “preserving interconnection obligations throughout and beyond the ongoing transition to all-IP networks is a cornerstone in supporting competition in the digital age,” hailing the importance of some kind of regulatory backstop.

Keep the Internet open, said Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., in a video the Internet Association posted online Tuesday. “Keep it robust, open, to keep it as a sense a free marketplace of ideas and innovation,” Booker said in the 2 1/2-minute video (http://bit.ly/1miFVhh). It featured interviews with officials from CardCash, Google, Uber, websignia and Yelp. “The more connected you are, the more opportunity that’s going to come your way,” Booker said. “It’s critical that lawmakers understand the potential and possibility.” Carley Graham Garcia, Google’s head of global industry relations, said “it’s critical that folks everywhere, especially here in New Jersey, care about the open Internet so that people have access to Internet from all corners of our country.”