Republicans Unlikely to Seek House Floor Amendments Fight on Net Neutrality Bill
Republicans will actively oppose the Save the Internet Act net neutrality bill (HR-1644) when it comes up for a House floor vote next week, but there's unlikely to be a repeat of the protracted amendments fight seen during the House Commerce Committee's Wednesday markup, said ranking member Greg Walden, R-Ore., in a Thursday interview. House Commerce cleared HR-1644 Wednesday night on a 30-22 party-line vote, as expected (see 1904030077). That followed a more than nine-hour, sometimes-heated debate and series of votes on 15 amendments, including 13 sought by Republicans.
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 made our arguments and I do still have deep concerns” about HR-1644, including about potential legal inconsistencies in language that Democrats believe would lock in place FCC forbearance from many parts of Communications Act Title II for broadband regulation, Walden told us. HR-1644 and Senate companion S-682 would add a new title to the Communications Act that reverses the FCC order, rescinding its 2015 rules. The bill would restore reclassification of broadband as a Title II service (see 1903060077).
“I think eventually we're going to get to a place where we'll be able to negotiate” on a compromise net neutrality bill “but [Democrats] have to get this” push for HR-1644/S-682 “out of their political system first,” Walden said. "We will live to negotiate another day." Telecom law observers universally expect the House to pass HR-1644, likely on a near party-line vote. S-682 faces longer odds in the Senate, where it would require a minimum 60 votes to end debate and pass the measure. Democrats “know as well as I do” that President Donald Trump “will never sign” the legislation even if it did reach his desk, Walden said.
House Communications Subcommittee Chairman Mike Doyle, D-Pa., said during the markup he believes Democrats and Republicans “have a fundamental disagreement” on HR-1644 that couldn't be resolved within House Commerce. “We believe the provisions in the bill are tight and they're strong, and that they will withstand legal muster,” Doyle said. “If all we do here in Congress is pass a bill” that only contains baseline bans on blocking, throttling and paid prioritization, as Republicans seek, “then we haven't done our job.”
Democrats believe it's important for legislation to also account for “future behavior that we haven't thought about yet” and that the FCC is better qualified than the FTC to handle those future issues, Doyle said. Other House Commerce Democrats also strongly supported HR-1644 at the close of the markup, including committee Vice Chair Yvette Clarke of New York and Rep. Anna Eshoo of California.
Walden introduced and then withdrew an amendment that would have required the FCC to “initiate a proceeding to examine the influence of all entities on the virtuous circle of the internet ecosystem and protecting the access of consumers to a free and open internet.” Walden highlighted Republicans' concerns about net neutrality proposals not applying equally to edge providers, an issue he recently cited in his push to use the net neutrality debate to also re-examine online platforms’ content liability protections under Communications Decency Act Section 230. Walden recently argued that edge providers' insistence they need the Section 230 protections makes them sound like common carriers (see 1903080032). Walden said he hoped House Commerce would in the future have a “broader look at the internet ecosystem” given Republicans' concerns.
House Commerce also voted down an amendment from Rep. Billy Long, R-Mo., that would have exempted “multi-gigabit” broadband services and “related emerging technologies” from HR-1644. Doyle said the amendment would effectively be a “sunset” on net neutrality rules.
Walden didn't rule out the possibility that Republicans will move to seek floor consideration of some amendments they filed but didn't seek votes on at the House Commerce markup, but Democrats “probably won't let us bring any amendments to the floor anyway.” Doyle told reporters he's committed to continue moving HR-1644 through regular order once it reaches the floor.
The amendments Republicans didn't seek votes on in House Commerce included the text of the three net neutrality bills they filed in February -- the Open Internet Act (HR-1006), Promoting Internet Freedom and Innovation Act (HR-1096) and HR-1101. Republicans touted those measures as pathways to a compromise net neutrality bill that wouldn’t rely on Title II as a legal basis (see 1902250051). “I think we know how the votes were going to go on those” amendments that didn't get called up in House Commerce given that Democrats voted uniformly against other GOP-sought amendments, Walden said.
House Consumer Protection Subcommittee ranking member Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., told us it's “yet to be determined” whether she'll seek to file the text of her HR-1096 as a floor-level amendment. HR-1096 mirrors a Washington state law, which restored net neutrality protections in the FCC's rescinded rules for state-level purposes (see 1802280027), including a paid prioritization ban.
Republicans also filed but didn't seek votes on three other amendments. They included one that would require the FCC within three days of HR-1644 being enacted to issue a report to the House and Senate Commerce committees “that lists the 27 provisions” of Title II “and the over 700 rules and regulations” the FCC forbore from in the 2015 rules. Another would have exempted ISPs providing broadband service “with speeds of greater than” 10 Gbps “to community colleges” from HR-1644. A third, on FCC authority, was identified as a discussion draft.