Net Neutrality Deal Would be Good, Sherman Says
LOS ANGELES -- Consensus among the interests on net neutrality would be good, and both political parties would seem to agree, said Majority Chief Counsel Roger Sherman of the House Commerce Committee. Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., welcomes a legislative approach “that everyone can get behind and can become law,” but the FCC “can’t sit still waiting for Congress to act,” Sherman said at an NCTA lunch. “The door is open, and I'm sure [Minority Counsel] Neil [Fried] would agree we'd love to hear suggestions.”
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.
Fried didn’t disagree. But he said the FCC shouldn’t be trying to reclassify broadband. Any consensus should be achieved on Capitol Hill, Fried said in response to a question from the audience: “We can’t claim consensus at the FCC if they don’t have authority to begin with.” FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski bypassed the hurdle of showing that regulation is needed before proposing that the agency act, Fried said in a panel discussion. Of Genachowski’s proposed “third way” response to Comcast, Fried said, “Just because you don’t like the dice you have doesn’t mean you get to swap them out.” “The future of broadband is much more up in the air now if we follow this path.”
If industry has ideas about “things that need to be tweaked and reformed and updated” in the Communication Act, “I think we're always ready to listen,” Sherman said. “Certainly in the next Congress or two, I think there are going to be increasing calls for an update of the act. A lot of it I think depends on implementation of the third way” proposed by Genachowski. Some in the White House are looking at issues like spectrum and its budget implications, the Universal Service Fund and public safety, though not necessarily broadly rewriting the law, Sherman said. He hopes a discussion draft of a bipartisan bill to fund the D block will be available soon, and “everyone thinks that spectrum inventory is a good thing,” he added. Fried also indicated Republican interest in dealing with the D block. But “as we outgrow those apron strings” of the act, “I don’t know that we should look to create new ones,” he said. “Are there things to be changed? Yes. I would argue more on the deregulatory side than the regulatory side. … I don’t think we should answer the question too quickly that there has to be something next."
The six Title II sections of the Communications Act that Genachowski seeks to apply to broadband transport are “the minority of provisions, but it is the bulk of what title II is about,” Fried said. Sherman said Sections 201 and 202 aren’t “that controversial.” He added, “If the forbearance is done correctly, it’s highly unlikely that will be overturned. So you can put in place mechanisms to provide the certainty that investors need. I think the FCC is committed to doing it the right way, with a very light regulatory touch.”
The number of industry and public-interest groups seeking changes in the way the FCC handles retransmission-consent disputes between stations and pay-TV providers is “impressive,” Sherman said. “If you want to keep folks engaged on the issue, it’s smart to keep the stakeholders involved.” Of any commission action on retransmission consent, Fried told the audience of cable and communications representatives, “These are the folks we're trying to stop from micromanaging your Internet service. I'm not sure we want them micromanaging” carriage deals.