House Lawmakers Set Up Rate Regulation Friday Vote Amid Partisan Divisions
The No Rate Regulation of Broadband Internet Access Act (HR-2666) faced its first partisan floor vote Wednesday, ahead of a vote on the underlying measure Friday. House lawmakers adopted House Resolution 672 in a 242-182 vote Wednesday, setting up the terms of the Friday floor vote on the measure itself. Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, D-Md., urged Democrats to vote no on the resolution.
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.
The resolution provides a structured rule giving an hour of debate controlled by House Commerce, terms shaped by the Rules Committee Tuesday. The Rules Committee found three of the four Democratic amendments filed in order (see 1604110054). The one amendment Rules didn't judge in order was filed by Rep. John Yarmuth, D-Ky., and involved disclosure of broadcast political advertising sponsors. On the House floor Wednesday, he complained that his amendment wasn't found in order even though it was “germane,” and would have sent a message to the FCC, and slammed HR-2666 as unnecessary.
“The bill is targeted and does one thing only -- it prohibits the Federal Communications Commission from regulating the rates charged for broadband Internet access,” said Rep. Michael Burgess, R-Texas, a Rules Committee member who's also on Commerce, on the House floor Wednesday. “Make no mistake, the Federal Communications Commission is very eager to regulate the Internet” and “can’t help itself,” Burgess later said. “Under net neutrality, the federal government will have the ability to control the Internet.” FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler has refuted any intentions to regulate the Internet.
Rep. Jared Polis, D-Colo., also a Rules Committee member, spoke on the floor Wednesday of many areas of the country without sufficient access to Internet. He scoffed at the idea of “cramming in” this FCC bill before doing a budget. The White House threatened a veto of HR-2666 Tuesday, echoing concerns from Capitol Hill Democrats and public interest groups that HR-2666 is overbroad and would undermine FCC authority (see 1604120071). The Electronic Frontier Foundation started petitioning against the bill this week. “At best, H.R. 2666 is a poorly written bill that brings a host of unintended consequences,” the group said. “At worst, it’s a calculated attempt to undermine the net neutrality principles we’ve all been fighting for.”
“The mere possibility of the FCC reneging on its forbearance of broadband rate regulation under Title II creates significant uncertainty that chills long-term investment,” said Information Technology and Innovation Foundation policy analyst Doug Brake. “Thankfully, virtually everyone agrees that rate regulation is not appropriate for the consumer broadband market, and a narrowly tailored piece of legislation could easily take it off the table.” HR-2666 “attempts to do just that” and there’s “undoubtedly a line that can be drawn between the tools the FCC legitimately needs to enforce its rules and the investment-dampening uncertainty around price regulation,” Brake said. “The administration and others who have pushed back on this bill should work with the sponsors to find that line, instead of dismissing this effort out of hand.”
“The merits of such legislation should be obvious to anyone familiar with the pitfalls of price controls, which extensive economic literature has shown to be a recipe for hurting consumers by causing a mismatch of supply and demand,” said Competitive Enterprise Institute Associate Director-Technology Studies Ryan Radia in a blog post defending the measure.