NCTA Says Net Neutrality Rules Could Spur Investment, Create Jobs

It was “fairly predictable” that telecom companies would be hesitant “to come forward in opposition to something” that their “regulator had done,” Cantor said. Defunding net neutrality at the FCC “is certainly a priority for us” as budget negotiations move forward, he said. The House, meanwhile, will “move forward in the coming weeks” on legislation in the Commerce Committee to overturn the FCC’s net neutrality regulations, he said. Republicans “believe that the Internet has been a tremendous source of growth in our economy and has also facilitated an entirely new way of communications” from a social and business perspective, Cantor said: “And we believe that introducing government control over the Internet is something that is an impediment to future growth in that arena and others."

Republican lawmakers got little help from NCTA and CTIA in a search for industry support to overturn the FCC net neutrality order. NCTA President Kyle McSlarrow and CTIA President Steve Largent replied late Monday to questions from Chairman Fred Upton, R-Mich., of the House Commerce Committee, Communications Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore., and subcommittee Vice Chairman Lee Terry, R-Neb. McSlarrow said the commission’s new rules could promote investment and job creation if carried out properly. Largent didn’t go quite that far, but agreed that the FCC order was better than a Title II approach.

Responding to another letter from the committee Republicans, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski pointed to sections of the order that he said prove it will have no ill effects to jobs, the economy, market investment or small businesses. Market analysis was “an integral part” of the commission’s policymaking, Genachowski said. “These efforts culminated in light-touch rules of the road that preserve Internet freedom and openness, increase certainty in the marketplace, and ensure that broadband providers can reasonably manage their networks and innovate with respect to technology and business practices."

Neither CTIA nor NCTA will testify at a hearing Wednesday on Walden’s joint resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act. House Republicans have been trying to build industry support for the resolution. They didn’t get it from the NCTA and CTIA letters.

"The plain reading of the Order, coupled with some regulatory humility, should … provide greater certainty than the status quo,” McSlarrow said. The order “minimizes the overhang on investment decisions for new and innovative services that are currently deployed, and thus, if implemented and enforced modestly, should promote continued investment and job creation,” he said. But some companies have tried “to inject more uncertainty,” and the efforts probably will continue, he said.

The order could have been worse, though CTIA didn’t think any rules were needed, Largent said. “To the extent that issuance of the order removes the specter of having Title II regulation imposed on broadband services … the order provides a level of certainty.” But “some degree of uncertainty remains” because the order could be overturned in court, it’s unknown how the FCC will carry out and enforce the rules, and service disclosure requirements don’t make it clear how broadband providers should comply, he said. No CTIA member has suggested that the order will help the economy or create jobs, Largent said. Generally, “increased regulation tends to depress rather than accelerate investment,” he said.

As expected, AT&T plans to support the FCC rules at the hearing (CD March 8 p1), as indicated from a copy of written testimony that we obtained. Senior Executive Vice President Jim Cicconi planned to say the FCC order is “not ideal,” but the carrier can live with it. He quotes a January speech in which CEO Randall Stephenson said AT&T can commit to 10- and 15-year investments under the final FCC rules.

Genachowski said he has no plans to close the FCC docket on Title II and other proposals to cement the FCC’s broadband authority. An open rulemaking “seeks public comment on many questions about legal and policy issues relating to broadband, without proposing any particular agency action,” he said. The record “remains open to collect information that may be helpful for the Communications Act, as many in Congress and the private sector have suggested is needed."

Upton, Walden and Terry said Genachowski’s response lacks substance. “The analysis the FCC points to in its order does little more than summarize the comments of parties and provide conclusory statements,” the three Republicans said in a joint statement. “The committee will continue to scour the referenced text for a glimmer of legitimate analysis, but frankly we expect more from an ‘expert’ agency.”