Net Neutrality Advocates Could Harm Broadband Bills, Stevens Says
Broadband mapping bills could face amendments from net neutrality advocates, hindering the legislation’s progress during this session of Congress, Senate Commerce Committee Ranking Member Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, told reporters Tuesday. Though the legislation has broad bipartisan support, Stevens said, any telecom bill could be subject to amendments from advocates concerned about recent actions by network operator they consider evidence of a need for federal net neutrality protections.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
“They would be doing their own cause a disservice,” an industry source said. The legislation has its own momentum, the source said, adding that the bills offer bipartisan “constructive” ideas on how to expand broadband services. But Stevens speaks from experience: A multititle omnibus telecom bill was derailed in the last Congress over net neutrality. Activists supported by prominent Democrats pushed hard to put neutrality language in the bill, which GOP leaders then decided to drop from consideration due to anticipated protracted floor debate.
There’s no big push for net neutrality amendments to mapping bills, but the chance increases if legislation gets to the floor of either chamber. The House could take up its mapping bill (HR-3919) on its suspension calendar as early as next week, a committee aide said, and if it’s not then it will be after Thanksgiving. The committee marked up the measure last week. The Senate Commerce Committee approved its mapping bill (S-1492), but there are no plans yet for floor action.
Public Knowledge called for net neutrality legislation after reports about Comcast’s management of its peer-to-peer traffic raised concerns about network interference. Comcast’s actions, which the company has defended as prudent network management, “shows yet again that Congress has to act to preserve an open and non-discriminatory Internet,” Public Knowledge President Gigi Sohn said two weeks ago. Public Knowledge is among a handful of net neutrality supporters that asked the FCC in a petition last week to prohibit network operators from interfering with peer-to-peer activities.
Calls for net neutrality legislation also erupted a few weeks ago during a Senate Commerce Committee hearing following reports that Verizon had blocked advocacy group text messages. “Recent events demonstrate that we need effective regulations to protect consumers and ensure an open an vibrant communications platform,” said Sens. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., and Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, in a letter to FCC Chairman Kevin Martin. The senators have long supported net neutrality legislation.
Actions like these are what Stevens fears could lead to potential net neutrality amendments on broadband mapping bills, if they progress this session, he told reporters after a WCA conference. Stevens also predicted a difficult road for legislation that contains immunity for telecom companies that allegedly assisted in the president’s post-Sept. 11 electronic surveillance program. While the issue is not in his jurisdiction -- Senate Intelligence and Judiciary are responsible -- Stevens said he doesn’t think “we should punish telecom carriers.” The promise by Sen. Chris Dodd, D- Conn., to filibuster a bill with immunity language is a real threat, he said, saying Dodd “can stir the waters up pretty good.”