The Colorado News, Emergency, Weather and Sports Act of 2014 aims to help in “facilitating delivery of relevant television programming to unserved consumers,” said the four-page bill text provided to us Friday by a spokesman for Sen. Mark Udall, D-Colo. The text was not yet online. Udall introduced the Colorado NEWS Act, S-2375, last week with the backing of fellow Colorado Democrat Michael Bennet, and the bill has been referred to the Commerce Committee. Neither Udall nor Bennet belongs to Commerce. “For too long, TV market lines have orphaned Coloradans living in the Four Corners region from the news, weather, sports and emergency information they need,” Udall said in a news release (http://1.usa.gov/1jDOuVC), saying it’s no longer time for government studies. The bill would let TV providers transmit signals from Colorado-based broadcast stations to consumers living in La Plata and Montezuma counties, address copyright issues involving TV providers transmitting Colorado and New Mexico signals, and let broadcasters and TV providers “determine a fair way to ensure all Coloradans have 24-hour access to the news, emergency information, weather and sports most relevant to them,” the news release said. Udall may look to attaching S-2375 to the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act reauthorization legislation -- considered must-pass given STELA’s expiration at the end of the year -- to advance this bill. “Sen. Udall is open to passing this by any means available, including STELA,” Udall’s spokesman said.

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., is “reviewing” the House-passed version of the USA Freedom Act, HR-3361, “very carefully,” she said in a statement Thursday, citing the “considerable margin” by which it passed the House earlier that day (CD May 23 p9). “I have spoken with the president who is urging the Senate to pass the bill as well, and I am open to considering the legislation when the Senate returns to Washington.” Feinstein has strongly defended NSA surveillance authorities over the past year and discouraged lawmakers from curbing bulk collection of metadata. Several of the USA Freedom Act’s original co-sponsors in the House abandoned it, voting no, and multiple Senate Democrats who backed the original USA Freedom Act, introduced last fall, already have cautioned that the modified House version may be too weak to prevent government surveillance. The New York Times released an editorial (http://nyti.ms/1jL9HOI) Thursday evening slamming the bill due to such concerns: “Unfortunately, the bill passed by the House on Thursday falls far short of those promises, and does not live up to its title, the U.S.A. Freedom Act. Because of last-minute pressure from a recalcitrant Obama administration, the bill contains loopholes that dilute the strong restrictions in an earlier version, potentially allowing the spy agencies to continue much of their phone-data collection.”

The Domain Openness Through Continued Oversight Awareness Matters (DOTCOM) amendment would “hamstring NTIA as it attempts to do exactly what Congress has twice voted for unanimously -- namely, transferring responsibility for Internet governance to the multi-stakeholder community,” said House Commerce Committee member Mike Doyle, D-Pa., by email Thursday. DOTCOM, which seeks to delay NTIA’s transition of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) until a GAO study is completed, was approved as an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (HR-4435) Thursday (CD May 23 p6). The amendment was approved by 245-177 with full Republican support (http://1.usa.gov/1jYFPsz). Only 17 Democrats supported the amendment. “Delaying this transition allows anti-democratic nations to continue to use the IANA contract as a red herring to falsely claim that ’the U.S. government controls the Internet’ and argue for a greater role for governmental entities,” such as the ITU, said Doyle. “The amendment sends the wrong message to the multi-stakeholder community.”

The FCC and Justice Department should scrutinize AT&T’s proposed acquisition of DirecTV carefully to consider how it may hurt competition, said Senate Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee Chairwoman Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., and ranking member Mike Lee, R-Utah, Friday in a letter to those regulators. “It is important to validate and weigh these efficiencies against the potential competitive harms that could result from the transaction,” they said. “As always, the key to analyzing any merger should be the effect it will have on consumers, including price, choice, quality of service, and innovation.” The Antitrust Subcommittee plans a hearing on the deal this summer, they said, and they “will follow up with you based on the evidence and testimony reviewed during that process.” They point to the deal as potentially affecting consumer welfare. “Together with the recently announced merger between Comcast and Time Warner Cable,” AT&T/DirecTV “could potentially affect future innovation and technological advances, including the availability of online video distribution,” Klobuchar and Lee said.

Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., pressed Comcast on its net neutrality obligations, in a letter to Comcast CEO Brian Roberts Wednesday. “I am concerned that Comcast’s proposed acquisition of TWC is a threat to net neutrality and the open Internet,” Franken wrote (http://1.usa.gov/1kttEsm). “If Comcast were permitted to acquire TWC, it would make the nation’s biggest ISP even bigger, raising a serious risk that Comcast could act as a gatekeeper of Internet traffic on its networks. The existence of ‘full net neutrality rules’ is absolutely necessary, though likely not sufficient, to mitigate that risk.” Franken asked whether Comcast would abide by existing anti-blocking and anti-discrimination net neutrality requirements, first levied on Comcast as an obligation of acquiring NBCUniversal, beyond the January 2018 time set in that acquisition condition. Franken wants to know whether the cable company will maintain those protections “regardless of whether the FCC has implemented new and binding industry-wide net neutrality rules at that time,” he said. Comcast has defended its commitment to the net neutrality obligations and the potential consumer benefits of acquiring Time Warner Cable.

To delay NTIA’s transition of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, an amendment (http://1.usa.gov/1tlq9Hn) version of the Domain Openness Through Continued Oversight Matters Act will be submitted to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) (HR-4435) by House Commerce Committee Member and bill co-sponsor John Shimkus, R-Ill., Wednesday, said his spokesman. The act seeks to delay the transition until the GAO completes a study. “There is far too much at stake to rush this process or agree to a transition without a full understanding of the consequences,” said Shimkus in a House Commerce Committee news release (http://1.usa.gov/1gQraVW). “If the Internet’s core freedoms are lost, there is no going back.” The NDAA amendment was expected to be considered Wednesday on the House floor. The vote is expected Thursday, said the spokesman.

The Senate must pass the Expiring Provisions Improvement Reform and Efficiency (EXPIRE) Act, a group including CTIA, Fiber to the Home Council Americas, ITTA-the Voice of Mid-Size Telecommunications Carriers, NCTA, TechNet, the Telecommunications Industry Association and USTelecom told all U.S senators in a letter sent Tuesday. “The EXPIRE Act will extend the tax provisions that expired at the end of 2013,” which “benefit a wide range of taxpayers,” the letter said (http://bit.ly/R9RiP8). “The lack of timely action to extend these provisions injects instability and uncertainty into the economy and weakens confidence in the employment marketplace.” Don’t wait until the end of the year since companies are making choices now, the letter added. Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden, D-Ore., introduced the act and it cleared that committee April 28. It includes a provision on bonus depreciation that several industry stakeholders have sought from Congress in recent months.

The modified USA Freedom Act, HR-3361, lost support from several privacy advocate organizations before a House floor vote Thursday. Organizations pulled their backing after a latest, more heavily revised version of the bill (http://1.usa.gov/1nqlPmk) was unveiled by the Rules Committee Tuesday (CD May 21 p12), inspiring immediate dissent. It cleared the Judiciary and Intelligence committees in recent weeks in a different form. The act was “designed to prohibit bulk collection, but has been made so weak that it fails to adequately protect against mass, untargeted collection of Americans’ private information,” said Center for Democracy & Technology President Nuala O'Connor, withdrawing her group’s backing. “The bill now offers only mild reform and goes against the overwhelming support for definitively ending bulk collection.” New America Foundation’s Open Technology Institute also withdrew support. “Although we are still hopeful that the bill’s language will end the bulk collection of telephone records and prevent indiscriminate collection of other types of records, it may still allow data collection on a dangerously massive scale,” said OTI Policy Counsel Robyn Greene. The Electronic Frontier Foundation “cannot support a bill that doesn’t achieve the goal of ending mass spying,” it said. Access, the group promoting what it calls global digital freedom, also dropped support. “Today’s version would allow broad collection to continue under the guise of reform,” said Jennifer Granick, director of civil liberties at the Stanford Center for Internet and Society, in a blog post (http://bit.ly/1tkFOGU). The Senate will have to “make extensive improvements” to what is a “limited” version now, said the American Civil Liberties Union. Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., appeared before the Rules Committee Tuesday night speaking in favor of the new bill, also citing a statement of support from ranking member John Conyers, D-Mich. “This does end all government bulk collection of data, and not just the telephone data that’s been the subject of the public discussion here but any others than the government might do or wish to do in the future,” Goodlatte told Rules. President Barack Obama’s administration “strongly supports” swift House and subsequently Senate passage of the bill, the Office of Management and Budget said Wednesday (http://1.usa.gov/RUXdIm). The legislation “heeds the President’s call” on surveillance overhaul and strikes an appropriate balance, OMB said. Its “significant reforms would provide the public greater confidence in our programs and the checks and balances in the system,” OMB said. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., sponsor of the original Senate companion to the act, said during an oversight hearing of the FBI Wednesday that he is “concerned” about the changes to the House version.

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., lambasted the FCC NPRM on net neutrality. “If the FCC allows huge corporations to negotiate ‘fast lane deals,’ then the Internet will eventually be sold to the highest bidder,” Sanders said Tuesday on the Senate floor. “This is grotesquely unfair and this will be a disaster for our economy and for small businesses all across our country.” He thanked Commissioners Mignon Clyburn and Jessica Rosenworcel for their defense of net neutrality and questioned the positions of Commissioners Aji Pai and Mike O'Rielly. “When you talk about deregulating the Internet, you're talking about allowing money, big money, to talk,” which is “very, very wrong,” Sanders said. Internet providers should be treated like utilities, Sanders said. He recounted asking Vermont residents to weigh in on the possibility of regulators’ “attempt to do away with” net neutrality. FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler has defended his proposal as one that asks questions, including whether to attempt to ban paid prioritization deals and if so, how, and also emphasizes that as of now, there are no net neutrality protections in the U.S. (CD May 16 p1).

The Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for FY2015 (HR-4660) is tentatively scheduled for debate on the House floor sometime next week, said a House Republican leadership aide. The House Rules Committee approved the bill for full House consideration Monday (http://bit.ly/1jSepUY). That bill would provide $36.7 million for the NTIA, below the $51 million the executive branch requested (http://1.usa.gov/1iT4f6q). The funding would not include money for NTIA’s plan to transition the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, which many Republicans have criticized, the appropriations committee has said. Some Internet governance experts see HR-4660 as potentially more damaging to NTIA’s transition plan than the Domain Openness Through Continued Oversight Matters Act, which passed the House Commerce Committee May 8 (CD May 9 p10).