Coffman Bows 21st Century Internet Act, Backs Net Neutrality CRA Resolution

Supporters and opponents of the old rules acknowledged neither the CRA nor Coffman's bill faces an easy path forward this year given the mired political debate on net neutrality. The Senate voted in 52-47 in May to pass its version of the CRA resolution. House passage is considered more difficult because Republicans have a more robust majority there (see 1805160064).

“It is time for Congress to act” on net neutrality and “I am ready to lead the charge” toward bipartisan compromise, Coffman said at an Incompas-Engine event. The 21st Century Internet Act is “the strongest legislation put forward” to address net neutrality, an issue “too important to be left to an unelected” FCC. Coffman later told reporters the CRA still isn't his “preferred approach,” but he decided to support it because “there was no legislative movement” toward compromise. For now “an all-of-the-above strategy is the best way to go,” he said. “It's still my goal” for Congress to reach a legislative solution.

The bill would codify “the four principles of net neutrality,” Coffman said. It would create a Title VIII in the Communications Act that would ban blocking, throttling, "paid preferential treatment" and "unreasonable interference or disadvantage standard for Internet conduct." The plan would give the FCC authority to regulate ISPs on “unfair and deceptive acts or practices” but would bar the agency from prescribing “the rate that an [ISP] may charge” for broadband services. The legislation would set up ISP transparency rules, requiring providers disclose information on “network management practices, performance (including speed, latency, and packet loss)."

Coffman touted his work to consult all sides of the debate in drafting, acknowledging House Commerce Committee GOP leaders may be skeptical. Congress and particularly House Commerce “deferred to the FCC … where we should have taken” the lead, he told reporters. House Commerce Republicans could oppose Coffman's bill partly because it would outright ban paid prioritization, which House Communications Subcommittee Chairman Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., and others resisted this Congress (see 1804160058 and 1804170037).

House Communications "had a substantial debate” on paid prioritization and for leaders like Blackburn, “it's a settled question, but obviously for me and a lot of other members of Congress, it's not a settled question,” Coffman said. “So we're bringing this debate forward again.”

House Commerce Help

House Commerce staff “provided whatever level of technical assistance [Coffman] and his team sought” as they wrote the bill “and we know his interest in the issue is heartfelt and strong,” said Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore., in an interview. “We'll take a look” at Coffman's bill, but “there are lots of bills on this,” including Blackburn's Open Internet Preservation Act (HR-4682). That doesn't include language on paid prioritization (see 1712220043). House Communications ranking member Mike Doyle, D-Pa., told us he hadn't had a chance to review the Coffman bill.

Doyle is pleased Coffman signed on to the CRA resolution, which he sponsored in the House. It represents the “next benchmark” for accelerating momentum for the measure, Doyle said: “Anyone who helps get signatures” from the GOP caucus will be an asset.

Walden's “deeply disappointed” Coffman signed on. “I've never been a fan of it and I didn't know he was going to do it,” Walden said. Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., who sponsored the Senate CRA, hopes "more Republicans will join this effort and stand on the side of American families who rely on and overwhelmingly support a free and open internet."

Public Knowledge Vice President Chris Lewis sees Coffman's backing of the CRA as a good omen. “People thought the CRA wouldn't pass the Senate, and then it did,” he said. “People told us we wouldn't get Republicans to sign on in either the House or the Senate, and now we've had it happen.” “We need every opportunity we can to bring these protections back,” Lewis said. “I think it's misguided to use the discharge process and most members” of House Commerce “would agree with that.”

American Action Forum Director-Technology and Innovation Policy Will Rinehart and others believe Coffman's backing of the CRA, at least for now, doesn't signal a fundamental shift in momentum in the measure's favor. “A lot of steam has been let out of the CRA train,” especially since the rescission took effect last month, Rinehart said. The FCC's order took effect June 11 (see 1806110054), and since then, seven House members have signed onto the discharge petition -- Coffman included.

“Who knows what Congress will do, but it's unlikely” in the legislative calendar that lawmakers will pursue any sort of net neutrality legislation, Rinehart said. “I would have thought at this point there would be 25-30 House Republicans who would have been in the process of signing onto the CRA,” said a telecom lobbyist: Coffman's decision to sign on “might encourage other vulnerable Republicans to do the same, but I'm still skeptical.”

Communications sector stakeholders' reactions were divided. The Computer & Communications Industry Association, Internet Association, Free Press and New America's Open Technology Institute supported Coffman. TechFreedom President Berin Szoka pronounced Coffman's bill “dead on arrival,” his support for the CRA an “empty political gesture.”