Blackburn’s Net Neutrality Bill Slated for Introduction Friday

Sean McLean, Blackburn’s legislative director, first circulated the draft bill among House Republican legislative directors Wednesday night. Blackburn had announced earlier that day her intent to propose legislation following the FCC saying it would seek to reinstate net neutrality rules using the broadband authority of Communications Act Section 706 (CD Feb 20 p1). A January U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit decision had vacated the agency’s 2010 rules. McLean sought co-sponsors and told legislative directors that Blackburn plans to introduce the legislation Friday during the pro forma session. Congress is not in session this week, following the federal holiday Monday. Blackburn’s office declined comment on any pending net neutrality legislation.

Blackburn’s Internet Freedom Act is two pages long, and would “prohibit the Federal Communications Commission from regulating certain network management practices of broadband Internet access service providers,” said the draft. The bill would limit FCC authority, wherein the agency’s 2010 net neutrality order “shall have no force or effect, and the Commission may not reissue such regulations in substantially the same form, or issue new regulations that are substantially the same as such regulations, unless the reissued or new regulations are specifically authorized by a law enacted after the date of the enactment of this Act,” the text said. It makes exceptions in cases of FCC regulation involving national security, public safety and law enforcement.

Many Republican offices we surveyed were just beginning to review the draft text of the Blackburn bill, circulated less than 24 hours earlier. Ryan Walker, chief of staff to House Communications Subcommittee Vice Chairman Bob Latta, R-Ohio, said his staff will recommend that Latta co-sponsor Blackburn’s bill. Latta had issued a statement following the FCC’s announcement expressing disappointment. House Republicans largely oppose net neutrality rules. Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton, R-Mich., and Communications Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore., had slammed the FCC’s plans to develop new rules. Rep. John Shimkus, R-Ill., “will cosponsor the bill,” a spokesman told us. “Be it net neutrality or the more recent concerns raised by [House Commerce] Republicans and Commissioner [Ajit] Pai that the FCC may be pressuring news media into covering certain stories, it seems there’s no shortage of solutions in search of problems at the FCC. Now more than ever it’s critical we hold the FCC accountable to protect both the Internet and newsrooms from unnecessary government regulation.” The spokesman was referring to controversy surrounding the design of the FCC’s Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs, which House Republicans have criticized (see separate report in this issue).

The Blackburn bill is no surprise, said a Democratic aide, comparing it to Blackburn’s earlier bill from the 112th Congress and citing her vocal opposition to net neutrality rules. Blackburn’s bill title of the Internet Freedom Act is ironic considering it blocks net neutrality rules, the aide added, suggesting it does not accurately reflect what the bill does. The aide framed net neutrality as a “highly charged issue” politically, with a distinct split among Republicans and Democrats. That aide doesn’t envision either the Democratic or Republican net neutrality legislation moving.

Blackburn’s bill is expected and the “obligatory Republican counterweight” to Democratic legislation, said Computer & Communications Industry Association Vice President-Government Relations Cathy Sloan. She judged the chances of advancing to be “none, zero” and suspects it would be hard to convince constituents of the bill’s virtues. Sloan has doubted any bill touching net neutrality would advance in Congress, but she backs FCC net neutrality protections. Blackburn has been one of the more outspoken critics of net neutrality and referred to the FCC’s “socialistic” regulation and comparing U.S. government efforts to those of China. Blackburn has said the Democrats’ net neutrality bill would create “an Internet Iron Curtain.” Sloan was dubious of the rhetoric: “It’s possible she can be more successful by being more strident but not necessarily.”

The Republican-controlled House could pass the bill, the Democratic aide and Sloan conceded. But the House Commerce Committee has a lot of members with telecom expertise, and regardless of party affiliation, they may realize that stripping the FCC of such authority is “probably not a good idea,” Sloan said. “It’s a tough sell.” Even if it passed the House, it would never make it to President Barack Obama’s desk or become law, the Democratic aide said, emphasizing the administration’s strong support for net neutrality protections.

Blackburn’s bill has no chance of becoming law, one media industry lobbyist agreed. She said the issue’s too hot for any movement in general, although she thinks it will be interesting if conservatives do take up net neutrality in this way. But watch for whether Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., backs the bill or not, she added. Scalise chairs the Republican Study Committee and could be a significant factor in amassing co-sponsors for the bill, the lobbyist said. Scalise’s office had no comment.

"Any bill on this topic is unlikely to pass in this Congress,” said Free Press Policy Director Matt Wood. Free Press advocates that the FCC have all the authority it needs to protect net neutrality and thinks reclassifying broadband as a Title II telecom service is “the only answer and the best one,” he added. Of the partisan divide, Wood reflected that “Internet freedom is something everyone needs,” pointing to areas in which Republicans and Democrats have attempted “some bridging of that divide,” such as in recent months in tackling the question of government phone surveillance.

The 2011 version of Blackburn’s Internet Freedom Act had 81 co-sponsors, 80 Republicans, including Walden and Scalise, and one Democrat -- the former Rep. Dan Boren of Oklahoma. That version of the bill touched less on net neutrality and focused more on forbidding the FCC from regulating IP-enabled services, with exceptions for national security, public safety and law enforcement. It was referred to the Communications Subcommittee in February 2011 and never advanced.

Net neutrality has created a divide that may influence any Communications Act overhaul, which the House Commerce Committee leadership has said it will embark on in 2014 and 2015. “The partisan split on open Internet just highlights the lack of bipartisan consensus on telecom issues,” Sloan said. Any search for a uniting issue of bipartisan consensus has proven “elusive,” she remarked. The jury’s still out on what any telecom overhaul would entail, the Democratic aide said. The aide would not be surprised if anti-net neutrality efforts became wrapped up in an overhaul, he said, pointing out how Republicans have looked to other legislative vehicles in the past to attack net neutrality rules. (jhendel@warren-news.com)