Hill Staffers Clash Over Net Neutrality, Privacy and Potential for Legislative Deal

"Republicans are for a free and open internet," said Charles Flint, an aide to House Communications Subcommittee Chairman Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn. "We want to work together. We want to have a legislative solution because it provides long-term certainty." He noted Blackburn doesn't want to "foreclose discussion" of broadband paid prioritization arrangements.

Republicans are moving to undo Democratic initiatives to try to force concessions, said Gerald Leverich, an aide to House Commerce Committee ranking member Frank Pallone, D-N.J. Leverich criticized GOP use of the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to repeal FCC broadband privacy rules. Pallone "is skeptical" of a net neutrality agreement, Leverich said. "People are sort of retreating into their corners on issues generally, and I think that includes net neutrality.”

Senate GOP staffer David Quinalty disagreed, saying Commerce Committee Chairman John Thune, R-S.D., continues to seek bipartisan legislation for "clear and durable" open internet protections without Title II of the Communications Act. "The politics are what people make of it," Quinalty said, noting he was speaking for himself on that point. "We’re very interested to have a dialogue with any stakeholders who want to try to come together to find a real solution. ... I don’t think everyone is retreating back to their corners. Republicans stand ready to engage."

Senate Commerce Committee ranking member Bill Nelson, D-Fla., agrees legislation is the only path to lasting certainty, but it "can't just pay lip service to net neutrality" and must contain "real protections" that preserve "flexible forward-looking" FCC authority, said aide John Branscome. He lauded Thune's "good will" and "great working relationship" with Nelson: "Our committee is very bipartisan, but too many people right now are dug in ... to really be able to find consensus." He called FCC Chairman Ajit's Pai's proposals to roll back Title II net neutrality protections "shockingly partisan" and the CRA privacy repeal "heavy-handed." Many Democrats see "a full-scale partisan attack on the free and open internet," he said: Nelson "is an optimist, but he’s concluded the climate is really not right to negotiate" on net neutrality.

Staffers traded more fire over the CRA veto of the 2016 FCC privacy order that targeted broadband ISPs. Leverich said there was a "huge public backlash" to the Republican move, which he said went straight to the House floor with limited debate. But Flint said Blackburn "believes privacy ought to rest solely with the FTC the way that it had" before the FCC reclassified broadband providers as common carriers. It's "strange" to blame Republicans for restoring "balance to the internet ecosystem," Quinalty said. "After a hyper-partisan vote at the commission, the FCC stole away authority over broadband providers on privacy from the FTC, and then on a party-line basis put into place very unbalanced, ill-conceived rules on broadband providers," he said. He said if Democrats want to seek a "different balance," Thune is "happy to talk."

Branscome said critics of the privacy rules could have participated in an open proceeding to reverse or modify them. The CRA repeal "was done with a very limited amount of debate in a very rushed way with limited public input," he said. He and Leverich suggested more Republicans would have opposed the repeal if the public had had more time to weigh in. Quinalty disagreed on the process criticism, noting the CRA has been around for years and Democratic senators gave back floor time. Flint noted House Democrats in 2008 attempted to use the CRA to repeal Republican FCC media ownership rules.

Quinalty said Thune is open to discussing open internet and privacy issues together. "People have to be at the table willing to discuss these things in a serious way instead of just posturing," he said.

When asked about top priorities, neither Democrat mentioned net neutrality. Branscome cited "infrastructure" and other matters, and Leverich cited Pallone's "security, opportunity and connectivity" telecom and tech agenda. Quinalty mentioned broadband deployment, including the Mobile Now spectrum bill, and "bipartisan net neutrality legislation." For Blackburn, "it's simple: broadband, broadband, broadband -- that's her top priority," Flint said.

The partisan tensions eased when broadband infrastructure was raised. "The Senate Commerce Committee absolutely stands ready to offer legislation and ideas targeted to broadband" if there's an infrastructure package, Quinalty said. “It certainly seems there’s very strong bipartisan interest in including broadband at least in any discussion around infrastructure.” He said Mobile Now could form the basis for some broadband infrastructure provisions.

Branscome agreed broadband infrastructure efforts were bipartisan and noted that a $1 trillion Senate Democratic infrastructure blueprint included $20 billion for expanding broadband and also would upgrade 911 call centers. He said a bill should include some mix of direct funding, tax incentives and "nonmonetary" provisions. "We stand ready to work with the administration on infrastructure," he said.

"We do feel like something is going to happen. There's a lot of bipartisan agreement," Flint said. He credited the 2009 broadband stimulus program with funding network deployment, but said the national broadband map hadn't been updated since June 2014: "We have to fix the maps because we don’t want to be building into areas that are already served."

Pallone supports the broadband infrastructure efforts, said Leverich. Pallone's "concern is that we make sure there's real direct investment in broadband" and "not just tax cuts or regulatory fixes," Leverich added. Branscome said Senate Democrats agreed broadband has "got to have direct spending" because "tax incentives are not enough."

Quinalty suggested Mobile Now and other committee bills had been held up because of Democratic retribution for the Senate's failure to reconfirm former Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel. He said if the president renominates Rosenworcel, "our hope is that may allow Mobile Now" and "a host of other bipartisan bills" to pass the Senate. Branscome said it was "unfortunate promises weren't kept last Congress" to reconfirm Rosenworcel, hoping she would be renominated and noting Nelson's support for Mobile Now.

Flint called Mobile Now "a good starting point" but doubted House passage as is. "There’s going to have to be some discussion about the 100/100 [MHz licensed/unlicensed spectrum] match provision in there," he said, noting Blackburn "might approach that a little differently."