House Opposition Could Tank VoIP E-911 Measure, Sources Say
House Commerce Committee Chmn. Barton (R-Tex.) is balking at Senate VoIP E-911 provisions in the port security bill (HR-4954) headed for conference, Hill sources and industry sources said. “Barton’s position is that the House addressed E-911 and addressed it well” in passing the telecom bill (HR-5252) in June, a spokesman for Barton said: “We hope the full Senate takes it up.”
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
E-911 advocates pleaded with House and Senate leaders to preserve the measure in conference in a letter sent Tues. to House and Senate leaders. The House bill differs from the Senate measure on a central point: Waivers for VoIP providers unable to comply with an immediate requirement to make E-911 service available to all consumers. It isn’t clear whether Barton opposes the waiver provision or is acting on a jurisdictional challenge.
The Senate bill dropped language that would have allowed companies to apply for waivers from the FCC -- yielding to pressure from safety bodies strongly opposed to waivers, Hill sources said. Barton is said to object to the Senate bill, and doesn’t want to hash it out in a conference committee, sources said. But some Senate Republicans are miffed. “It’s sad that Republicans are playing politics with public safety,” said one Senate source.
“Barton’s driving on E-911,” said a Hill staffer. Sen. Rockefeller (D-W. Va.) is a strong backer of the bill, as is Sen. Burns (R-Mont.); neither has taken a public position on a conference. Senate Commerce Committee Chmn. Stevens (R- Alaska) promised Rockefeller he'd support the E-911 provisions in the port bill, also pledging that the port bill wouldn’t be a vehicle for telecom legislation -- a commitment important to Ranking Member Inouye (D-Hawaii).
“We trust that jurisdictional or other issues not related to the substance of this provision, will not trump the need to enact this important policy as part of the port security bill,” the National Emergency Number Assn. (NEMA) and National Assn. of State 911 Administrators said in their letter: “There is no more important issue among our respective organizations than deploying E-911 as quickly as possible.” The bill has a liability provision that would protect phone companies from 911-related litigation. Telcos back that, but are less enthusiastic about terms of a requirement to provide access to networks so calls can be completed.