Markey Urges Less China 5G Focus in US; Walden Pushes Edge Provider Classification Debate
The U.S. should make concerns about China less of a central factor in developing 5G deployment plans, said Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., during an appearance on C-SPAN's The Communicators online and set to have been televised over the weekend. House Commerce Committee ranking member Greg Walden, R-Ore., meanwhile, continued during a separate interview also set to be shown then to push lawmakers to consider whether edge providers should be considered common carriers given their importance as online gatekeepers (see 1903080032). The lawmakers differed on whether the Save the Internet Act net neutrality bill (HR-1644/S-682) will get significant bipartisan support.
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.
“We want to be cutting edge” and “don't want to be left behind” on 5G, Markey said. That “doesn't necessarily mean we have to follow a Chinese model” for deploying the technology. There has been debate about the direction President Donald Trump's administration wants to take on 5G policy amid concerns about growing Chinese influence (see 1903050069). “America should respect China, but we shouldn't fear them” in the race to 5G, Markey said. It's “time for us to have our own 5G plan” and “we'll be fine” once it's implemented. A U.S.-created 5G plan will give “us the greatest position to ensure that the 5G plan of other countries doesn't insinuate itself” in U.S. networks.
Markey would be “very hesitant” to use a phone made by Chinese telecom equipment manufacturer Huawei given the security concerns about its close ties to the Chinese government and military. Markey, ranking member of the Senate Commerce Security Subcommittee, and other subpanel members invoked concerns about Huawei during a hearing earlier this month (see 1903070041). There's a “real caution sign that we should put up if we're going to allow these technologies” on U.S. systems, especially if China doesn't allow U.S. firms “similar access to their networks,” Markey said.
Burson Cohn & Wolfe told DOJ that Huawei hired the firm to give the Chinese company “strategic communications advice related to ongoing U.S. governmental and media inquiries.” The firm will develop a “reputation strategy specific” to U.S. concerns, recommend “strategy and media targets for briefs and Huawei campus trips” and identify “key opinion leaders (KOL) most relevant to issues facing Huawei,” the company said in a DOJ Foreign Agents Registration Act filing released Thursday.
BCW is an "integrated communications agency" created by the combination of Burson-Marsteller and Cohn & Wolfe. WPP owns the firm. Huawei didn't comment Friday.
Markey's “not ruling out” Senate passage of the Save the Internet Act despite widespread expectation that the bill stands a far better chance of passage in the majority-Democratic House. Filed earlier this month, it would add a new title to the Communications Act that says the FCC order rescinding its 2015 rules “shall have no force or effect.” The bill would retroactively restore reclassification of broadband as a Communications Act Title II service (see 1903060077). There's “going to be a lot of political pressure” for the Senate to take up S-682 if House companion HR-1644 passes that chamber when it comes to the floor next month (see 1903180068), Markey said.
Walden predicted an “overwhelming 'no' vote” from House Republicans when HR-1644 comes to the floor since party members are “generally opposed to the dead end” of government overregulation of the internet. The House Communications Subcommittee plans to mark up the bill Tuesday (see 1903220074). HR-1644/S-682 goes well beyond protecting against “bad behavior by the ISPs” via Title II reclassification, he said. Giving that “unbridled power” to the FCC will over time “have a chilling effect” on internet innovation. Republicans in February offered a trio of their own net neutrality bills sans Title II (see 1902220001).
Walden doesn't “know if I'm there yet” on a proposal by 2020 presidential hopeful Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., to break up Google, Facebook and Amazon in hopes of enabling smaller competitors (see 1903080034). But “we should consider whether” such edge providers “are common carriers” now, as he recently began proposing. “They have special privileges and protections” under online platforms’ content liability protections under Communications Decency Act Section 230, Walden said. That's a “pretty big waiver of liability and responsibility,” but those same companies don't want common-carrier rules applied equally on ISPs and themselves.