Senate Democrats Rebel Against GOP Net Neutrality Draft Legislation

The legislation would amend the Communications Act “to ensure Internet openness, to prohibit blocking lawful content and non-harmful devices, to prohibit throttling data, to prohibit paid prioritization, to require transparency of network management practices, to provide that broadband shall be considered to be an information service, and to prohibit the Commission or a State commission from relying on section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 as a grant of authority.” It defines paid prioritization as “the speeding up or slowing down of some Internet traffic in relation to other Internet traffic over the consumer’s broadband Internet access service by prioritizing or deprioritizing packets based on compensation or lack thereof by the sender to the broadband Internet access service provider.”

“We've long felt this is an issue best addressed by Congress,” AT&T Executive Vice President-Federal Relations Tim McKone said in a statement. “Investors and consumers need certainty, not years of litigation and possibly higher monthly bills.”

These goals track from the 11 net neutrality principles that Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John Thune, R-S.D., laid out Wednesday. Net neutrality advocates told us the rhetoric was a sea change from past GOP positions but wouldn't necessarily be a boon for the open Internet or FCC authority (see 1501150056).

Despite Thune’s repeated remarks about wanting a bipartisan compromise, no Democrats have backed the proposal. One House Democratic staffer said he doesn’t know of any on board and thinks including the language on Section 706 is a big reach.

This draft bill “would dramatically undermine the FCC’s vital role in protecting consumers and small businesses online by limiting its enforcement and rulemaking authorities in this critically important area,” said a joint statement from Democrats including Senate Judiciary Committee ranking member Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Cory Booker of New Jersey, Al Franken of Minnesota and Ron Wyden of Oregon. “The Republican bill would severely curtail the FCC’s ability to promote the deployment of broadband service.” They said they're glad the bill would apply the protections to wireline and wireless service. But it’s the FCC that should act without delay, the Senate Democrats said. Call it the “Big Broadband Baron Act,” Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., said in a statement. “It is a legislative wolf in sheep’s clothing, offering select few safeguards while undermining basic consumer, privacy and accessibility protections.”

Thune has discussed the bill for many weeks with Senate Commerce Committee ranking member Bill Nelson, D-Fla., though Nelson didn't commit to backing the bill. Thune expects “continuing discussions about an alternative to controversial FCC action with my ranking member Sen. Bill Nelson and other colleagues on both sides of the aisle at our hearing,” he said in a statement. House Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton, R-Mich., called the bill “thoughtful” and “the right solution” that everyone can back, emphasizing its focus on consumers and their control of their online activities. “By acting legislatively, we are putting forward a fresh, sustainable solution that accomplishes the goals we all share, without the needless trips to court that would jeopardize these core principles,” House Communications Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore., said.

“An explosion in the use of Internet technologies calls for updated rules and regulations, which is why I have been discussing with Sen. Thune and other members of the committee the potential for a bipartisan approach,” Nelson said in a statement. He wants “to keep the Internet free and open,” avoid stifling innovation, and due to consumer protection concerns, ensure the FCC has “flexible enforcement authority,” he said.

Leahy “is focused on building support for that measure to ban paid-prioritization agreements and protect a free and open Internet,” his spokeswoman told us Wednesday, declining to comment then on whether he is open to Thune’s legislation. Leahy and several Democrats reintroduced his bill to ban paid prioritization deals earlier this month. A spokesman for Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., a Title II backer, said she’s skeptical but will look at anything.

The House Communications Subcommittee's Wednesday hearing on the legislation, at 10 a.m. in 2123 Rayburn, will have as witnesses Amazon Vice President-Global Public Policy Paul Misener; CTIA President Meredith Baker; Etsy CEO Chad Dickerson; Minority Media and Telecommunications Council Vice President Nicol Turner-Lee; and NCTA CEO Michael Powell. Industry officials say to watch for the Senate Commerce Committee's 2:30 p.m. hearing Wednesday to possibly have as witnesses CTIA, ex-FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell and Midcontinent Communications Senior Vice President-Public Policy Tom Simmons.

CEA President Gary Shapiro hailed the “clear, simple, non-bureaucratic legislation that would preserve an open Internet, while encouraging competition among" ISPs and investment in the Internet, he said in a statement, saying “at first glance” the draft “contains thoughtful provisions.” Comptel CEO Chip Pickering welcomes the principles, he said in a statement. “At the FCC, there is a growing chorus of support for taking a proven light-touch policy approach to protect and promote the open Internet.” Public Knowledge Senior Vice President Harold Feld said the draft “takes several very real steps back” from the FCC 2010 net neutrality rules and lacks necessary consumer protections. It permits discrimination and doesn’t effectively prevent Internet fast lanes, he said in a statement. “As this draft reads, Comcast or AT&T or any other provider can offer its over-the-top online streaming service as a ‘specialized service’ and give itself prioritized service.”