Pro-Net Neutrality Bill Democrats Face Tough Odds to Shift Caucus; Many Lobbied in Q2 on Topic
A handful of congressional Democrats have publicly bucked their party’s overall resistance to negotiating with the Republican majority on net neutrality legislation, and they are unlikely to bring their colleagues back to the bargaining table soon, lobbyists told us. Top telecom-focused Capitol Hill Democrats, including Senate Commerce Committee ranking member Bill Nelson, D-Fla., and House Commerce Committee ranking member Frank Pallone, D-N.J., have signaled their party’s lack of short-term appetite for legislation amid FCC possible rollback of 2015 net neutrality rules and reclassification of broadband providers as common carriers under Communications Act Title II (see 1707130063). Some meanwhile wonder if the FCC will OK new rules based on Communications Act Section 706 authority (see 1707210040).
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.
House Democratic Conference Chairman Joe Crowley, D-N.Y., and Rep. Derek Kilmer, D-Wash., are among the minority of their party’s lawmakers who remain willing to push for net neutrality legislation. Others who have declared their preference for legislation include Reps. Mike Quigley, D-Ill., and Dutch Ruppersberger, D-Md. They along with Kilmer supported a congressional solution during a House Appropriations Committee markup last week (see 1707140056). “My constituents want to have fair access to the internet” and they can’t wait around for federal courts to rule on an expected legal challenge to the FCC’s impending decision, Crowley told us.
Kilmer said Congress “should do its job” rather than leave the fate of net neutrality up to courts and President Donald Trump’s administration. He noted that Congress “hasn’t revisited telecommunications regulations in a comprehensive way” since the 1996 Telecom Act and that the net neutrality debate shows why that should change. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., House Communications Subcommittee ranking member Mike Doyle, D-Pa., and others have cited the likely court challenge to the FCC as a primary reason for not seeking legislation in the short term.
Crowley acknowledged that his call for net neutrality legislation is perceived as diverging from Democrats’ current policy positions. He can’t be sure it doesn’t have majority support because “we haven’t had further discussion yet within the broader caucus at this point, so it would be premature to discuss where the conference lies.” A wider discussion among Hill Democrats on their net neutrality position will help them “deliberate and discuss it; you try to bring people around,” Crowley said. “Sometimes you’re successful, sometimes you’re not.”
Lobbying
Crowley’s support for net neutrality legislation is interesting but he doesn't have the same influence over telecom policy as Pallone and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., who both publicly oppose a compromise during this Congress, one communications industry lobbyist told us. “There will need to be a critical mass of Democrats, especially in the Senate, to want to do this,” the lobbyist said. “You can’t negotiate around Pallone and Pelosi.” The “table is already set” for net neutrality legislation but “there are aces in the hole for Democrats and Republicans” in leaving the situation unresolved, a Democratic lobbyist said.
Some Hill Democrats, including Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., felt burned by past attempts at compromise net neutrality legislation and emboldened to not return to negotiations because of the rancor over Hill Republicans’ Congressional Review Act resolution of disapproval effort that in March abolished FCC ISP privacy rules (see 1706070050 and 1706210059), lobbyists said. Other lawmakers see an opportunity to turn net neutrality into a part of their platform for the 2018 midterm election campaign, an industry lobbyist said. Hill Democrats “don’t want to give Republicans an out” when they perceive a rollback of the rules as being deeply unpopular outside of Washington, the lobbyist said.
A stronger emphasis in support of net neutrality legislation also is needed in the tech sector, which has opposed a rollback, for Hill Democrats to rethink opposition, lobbyists said. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian and the Internet Association say they favor a legislative solution even as they support existing rules. Public Knowledge and other digital rights groups have favored going to court to preserve the 2015 order. Facebook and other tech firms would need to strongly emphasize a pro-legislation message and digital rights groups would need to soften their opposition to a bill for the state of play to shift, a tech lobbyist said.
The number of companies, industry groups and others lobbying Capitol Hill on net neutrality increased slightly in Q2 to 56, up from 51 in Q1 and 52 in Q2 2016, records show. Entities lobbying on the issue included critics of the FCC’s 2015 rules like AT&T, Comcast and USTelecom, along with supporters such as Facebook, Netflix and PK.
Q2 Disclosures
Google remained the top lobbying spender in the tech sector in Q2, while AT&T topped telcos and Comcast led among media companies, additional records filed Thursday evening showed (see 1707200054). Google reported $5.9 million in lobbying expenditures, up 40 percent from the same period last year. Outside firms reported $1.1 million in income for lobbying on Google’s behalf during the quarter. AT&T reported $4.2 million in lobbying expenditures for Q2, up 2 percent from last year. Outside firms reported almost $1.4 million in lobbying income from the telco.
Comcast said it spent $3.8 million on Q2 lobbying, up almost 12 percent. Outside firms reported $1.8 million in lobbying income. Amazon’s spending increased to $3.2 million, up about 7 percent. Oracle’s spending increased 45 percent to $2.79 million and Facebook’s 9 percent to $2.38 million.
Microsoft's spending was unchanged at $2.07 million, while Intel decreased 14 percent to $925,000. Apple upped lobbying spending 24 percent to $2.2 million, while Twitter spent 30 percent less, to $120,000. Cisco spent 11 percent less at $50,000.