USTelecom’s Oct. 6 petition for forbearance from an array of legacy regulations brought competing claims about whether the rules are still needed and if being excused from the rules would help or hurt competition. Some involved in the net neutrality debate saw the petition as having implications in the debate over whether forbearance could easily ease the problems some see with a Title II net neutrality approach.

The Senate Commerce Committee plans to address regulatory issues for the Internet of Things in the next Congress, said committee members Deb Fischer, R-Neb., and Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., at an Information Technology and Innovation Foundation event Thursday. Intel, Toyota and USTelecom, among others, sponsored the event. “Policymakers can't bury their heads in the sand and pretend this technological revolution isn't happening, only to wake up years down the road and try to micromanage a fast-changing, dynamic industry,” said Fischer. “The federal government must also avoid regulation just for the sake of regulation,” she said. “We're destined to lose to the Chinese or others if the Internet of Things is governed in the United States by rules that pre-date the VCR,” Fischer said. ITIF released a report on “10 Policy Principles” for IoT. “Many Internet of Things projects will benefit from government agencies establishing partnerships with both the private sector and others in government,” said the report. “In particular, funding these types of projects can be challenging for cities with limited budgets,” it said. “Since subjecting these technologies to lengthy regulatory review processes can delay these benefits from reaching consumers, policymakers should work to ensure that these processes are as efficient as possible,” said ITIF.

The Communications Security, Reliability and Interoperability Council approved a report Wednesday from CSRIC Working Group 2 on wireless emergency alerts that recommends the FCC modify its current 90-character limit rule for WEA alerts, to allow for messages of up to 280 characters for 4G LTE devices following technology confirmation by the Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS). The FCC should retain the 90-character rule for WEA alerts for devices using legacy 2G and 3G networks, but the working group believes the goal should be to phase that limit out as 2G and 3G devices go offline, said CTIA Assistant Vice President-Regulatory Affairs Brian Josef, Working Group 2 co-chairman. “We’re raising the floor” but recognize that some devices will be able to accept WEA alerts of only up to 90 characters, Josef said during the CSRIC meeting.

The draft Connect America Fund order FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler is circulating before a scheduled vote at the commission’s Dec. 11 meeting would give price-cap carriers some but not all of what they’ve sought in return for backing an increase in the minimum broadband speeds for systems built with CAF support, from 4 Mbps to 10 Mbps downstream, said industry officials involved in the debate. Wheeler is proposing the faster speed requirement in the draft order (see 1411200032).

About three hours after FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler said at the Nov. 21 commission meeting that the agency needs to be careful in adopting net neutrality rules because “the big dogs will sue," (see 1411210040), a Verizon executive emailed him to say there’s one way to avoid having ISPs barking in court: Communications Act Section 706, an ex parte filing said. Saying he’d seen reports of Wheeler’s “view of the inevitability of litigation challenging the Commission’s eventual Open Internet rules,” Randal Milch, Verizon general counsel, included a blog post he’d written. Milch’s post describes why “Open Internet rules based on Section 706, and which prohibit 'harmful paid prioritization,’ will not be the object of a successful court challenge -- by Verizon or anyone else,” said the email, posted as an ex parte filing Tuesday in docket 14-28. Under a Title II approach, “the ISPs, and perhaps some in the tech industry, will have no choice but to fight the sudden reversal of two decades of settled law,” Milch wrote in the Nov. 4 blog post. Title II proponents could also sue “if the FCC forbears from too many arcane common carrier rules for their taste (and to keep their fund raising pipeline flowing),” he wrote. Should the FCC take a Section 706 approach, Milch’s blog post said, “all of the major ISPs and their trade associations have conceded that the FCC can lawfully prohibit harmful paid prioritization on this basis -- effectively waiving their ability to challenge the FCC’s authority to do so and taking them out of the litigation path.” USTelecom has said it would be “compelled” (see 1410310050), and AT&T has said it would “expect” to challenge a Title II approach in court. Opinions varied among those involved in the debate about whether Wheeler’s comment revealed the path the agency is considering. AT&T, USTelecom and Verizon declined to comment. One Title II opponent said Wheeler’s concern about a court challenge indicated the agency is moving toward some form of a Title II approach because the prospects of an ISP legal challenge would be moot under a Section 706 approach. Free State Foundation President Randolph May disagreed in an email to us, but said “I am hopeful he's beginning to recognize that Title II, even in hybrid form, is just way too problematical.” Public Knowledge Senior Vice President Harold Feld said he didn’t read much into the remark, describing it as a "'Washington poker face.’ Wheeler is well aware that any statement he makes will get scrutinized for clues. But he can't refrain from comment because people would try to figure out what his refusal to say anything means. So 'someone will sue, so we want the best Order possible' is about as safe as a prediction as possible,” Feld said. Free Press, in a letter to the FCC, posted Monday as an ex parte filing, again disputed the methodology used by economists Kevin Hassett and Robert Shapiro in a study submitted to the commission by USTelecom, saying capital investments by broadband providers could decline by as much as nearly a third over the next five years if the FCC takes a Title II approach. Hassett and Shapiro defended their study to us at the time (see 1411190035).

The continued decline in the number of customers with traditional landline phone service bolsters USTelecom’s petition for forbearance (see 1410070050) from “archaic regulations that divert spending to narrowband networks and perpetuate inefficient legacy network architecture,” the association said in a blog post Tuesday. By the end of 2015, more than half of households nationally will be using only wireless phones for voice service, and only about 5 percent will be using traditional switched lines, wrote USTelecom Senior Vice President-Communications Anne Veigle. Only 10 percent of households will get most or all their phone service from incumbents, the post said. The data was based on FCC landline data, as well as Centers for Disease Control national and state wireless data, the post said.

Neustar petitions protesting the local number portability administrator selection process and seeking a rebid “are all merely attempts to game the process,” and the FCC should select Telcordia as the next LNPA, Telcordia wrote the FCC Friday, according to an ex parte filling. CTIA, USTelecom, AT&T, Sprint and Verizon pressed aides to commissioners Mike O’Rielly, Ajit Pai and Jessica Rosenworcel plus Wireline Bureau and General Counsel staff last week to confirm Telcordia.

A draft order FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler circulated Thursday in preparation for possible action at the December commission meeting would, as we reported (see 1411190059), require providers receiving CAF support to offer broadband speeds of 10 Mbps downstream instead of 4 Mbps, a commission official told us.

Capital investments by broadband providers could decline by as much as nearly a third over the next five years if the FCC bases net neutrality rules on Communications Act Title II, said a study released Wednesday by USTelecom, which has said it would challenge reclassification in court. In an ex parte letter USTelecom also asked Wednesday for the commission to review the study. Title II proponents Free Press and Public Knowledge quickly dismissed the study. “This is another example of a made-to-order industry study, with predictions giving them the result they want, facts be damned,” said Free Press Policy Director Matt Wood. The study’s authors, Kevin Hassett and Robert Shapiro, said they had devised a new model that measures investment trends for services covered under Title II and not covered by the classification, then estimates the impact reclassification to Title II would have for both wireline and wireless. The study estimates that under the current regulatory structure, broadband providers are expected to make about $218.8 billion in new capital investments over the next five years. If the commission opts for reclassification, investments by ISPs would drop over the next five years to as low as $173.4 billion. Additional regulation, as well as the current regulatory uncertainty over net neutrality, and whether other aspects of the Internet will fall under Title II, would reduce the rate of return on the investments and deter spending, said Hassett, director of economic policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute. He was chief economic adviser to Republican presidential candidate John McCain during the 2000 primaries. Responding to a question, Shapiro said it’s not possible to factor how forbearance from Title II, as reclassification’s proponents advocate, would affect their projections. “To what level [there will be forbearance], how long it would take, what the legal process would be are all in a state of uncertainty,” said Shapiro, chairman of Sonecon, and chief economic adviser to President Bill Clinton’s 1992 presidential campaign. A reduction in investment would be significant, Shapiro said, because “the Internet plays such a critical role in the economic, social and political life” of the U.S. “Reclassification of broadband as Title II would be contrary to the national interest of broadband deployment and investment,” USTelecom President Walter McCormick said during a call with reporters. Wood called the study “absurd,” and said telecom investment reached its peak while still under Title II. “USTA's flimsy study is nothing more than a cynical attempt to scare Washington policymakers,” Wood said. The study didn’t factor in that the same infrastructure is used for voice, video and data, which are regulated differently, said Free Press Research Director Derek Turner. It also measured all capital investments, when nine “out of every 10 capital dollars spent by cable companies goes to set-top boxes and modems, not to the network,” Turner emailed. Turner's criticisms "unfortunately do not advance the debate," Hassett and Shapiro said in a statement to us. The economists said they included "reasonable assumptions" to account for the use of the same infrastructure by various services. The researchers said they did not examine cable, and stood by measuring capital investments, calling that the "the best metric for the overall impact of Title II regulation." Public Knowledge Senior Vice President Harold Feld also criticized USTelecom’s request for the study to be considered. “Of course the FCC will 'review' it, just like they review any other submission," Feld said. Of USTelecom, he said, "What do they want, a gold star?”

House and Senate Commerce Committee staffers coordinated informally to create what is the latest Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act reauthorization draft, as expected (see 1410150090). House lawmakers introduced the 22-page five-year STELA Reauthorization Act Tuesday. The draft still includes what may be its most controversial provision, at least in the Senate -- repeal of the set-top box integration ban.