Rep. Stivers Plans to Refile Net Neutrality Bill Without Paid Prioritization Ban
Rep. Steve Stivers, R-Ohio, plans to refile the Open Internet Preservation Act in a bid to provide additional alternative net neutrality legislation that doesn't involve reclassifying broadband as a Communications Act Title II service. The bill, previously filed in 2017,…
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.
would bar blocking and throttling but not paid prioritization. It would prevent the FCC from ever again claiming Title II or Section 706 as a legal basis for expanding net neutrality rules (see 1712190062). The House passed the Save the Internet Act net neutrality bill Wednesday. HR-1644 would reverse the FCC order rescinding 2015 net neutrality rules and restore reclassification of broadband as a Title II service (see 1904100062). "As the new House Majority pushes another attempt at protecting the Obama Administration’s FCC legacy of 'Net Neutrality' from 2015, House Republicans have again committed to a free and open internet," Stivers said in a letter to colleagues seeking co-sponsors for his bill. "Republicans have provided multiple legislative solutions seeking to codify the principles of Net Neutrality in law -- without resorting to" Title II. House Commerce Committee Republicans filed three alternative net neutrality bills in February as pathways to compromise legislation that wouldn’t rely on Title II as a legal basis -- the Open Internet Act (HR-1006), Promoting Internet Freedom and Innovation Act (HR-1096) and HR-1101 (see 1902250051). Stivers defended the lack of paid prioritization language in the bill, saying "taken to its logical extent, an absolute ban on paid prioritization could impact" existing "arrangements that are pro-consumer." Different "types of data are prioritized on both a paid and unpaid basis, and we need this to happen," he wrote. "Republicans can all oppose anti-competitive fast lanes, and we’ve proven that we are open to legislation codifying those protections, but pro-consumer agreements should not be thrown out to support the flawed promise of Title II regulation."