GOP Joins Democratic Mass. Senators Backing Bill to Grade ISPs on Net Neutrality, Privacy

“Consumers ought to be able to understand whether their" ISP "manages traffic on its network fairly and protects their private information,” emailed Senate Majority Leader Cynthia Stone Creem (D), who led a special committee on the issues and pitched senators at a private meeting in May (see 1805170041). “Until the Federal government is willing to be a strong regulator in this area again, the states must step forward to provide customers with meaningful information they can trust.” On the floor, Creem thanked Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr (R) for reaching bipartisan agreement. Service providers say they follow the principles, so they shouldn't oppose disclosing their practices to consumers, she said. The bill doesn’t directly block violations to avoid possible federal pre-emption issues, she said.

The Democratic-controlled Senate adopted two amendments by Republicans. Tarr's would require municipal and cooperative lighting plants that provide telecom to annually file revenue, expenses and a balance sheet for public inspection. Sen. Donald Humason's would let municipal gas and electric companies be designated as eligible telecom carriers qualifying for federal grants. The Senate rejected an amendment by Sen. Jamie Eldridge (D) to directly prohibit net neutrality violations.

The measure "will do little to protect consumers while hurting innovation and economic growth,” said New England Cable & Telecommunications Association (NECTA) General Counsel Tim Wilkerson. “The best solution is a bipartisan, federal net neutrality law that protects consumers and encourages investment here in Massachusetts and across New England.” NECTA members follow net neutrality principles, he said. The wireless industry is "committed to the open internet and to protecting consumers online," a CTIA spokesperson said. "State-by-state net neutrality legislation, like SB-2610, will create an uncertain landscape and hinder innovation. The best path forward is permanent, bipartisan federal legislation."

Under the bill that would take effect July 1, ISPs would have to disclose by Oct. 1 to the Department of Telecom and Cable “network management practices, performance characteristics and commercial terms of its broadband internet access services under 47 C.F.R. 8.1” and “privacy policy under the California Business and Professions Code §§ 22575 to 22579, if applicable.”

The bill would require DTC to write standards for a “Massachusetts Net Neutrality and Consumer Privacy Seal that shall allow an internet service provider to demonstrate that it: (i) provides equal access to an open and neutral internet; (ii) commits to and enforces policies which prohibit paid prioritization; and (iii) provides customers with a mechanism to easily opt-out of third-party access to customer proprietary information" for non-service delivery reasons. ISPs that would meet standards could display the seal on marketing materials, with fraudulent use considered a deceptive practice. The department would publish net management standards annually, no later than July 1, and grade ISPs, with highest ratings given to those that exceed standards.

Three other states passed net neutrality laws (see 1807160062). Washington state maintained net neutrality rules after its law took effect the same effective day as FCC deregulation. Oregon and Vermont enacted laws restricting state contracts to net neutral ISPs, with the Oregon Public Utility Commission opening dockets AR-618 and AR-619 to implement its law. California legislation to restore the 2015 order's rules is gaining steam and could be passed next month after recess (see 1807050036). Governors in Hawaii, Montana, New York, New Jersey, Rhode Island and Vermont issued executive orders restricting state contracts.

State commissioners are watching what happens on net neutrality because of its impact on consumers and the telecom landscape, said President Jack Betkoski in an interview this week at NARUC's just-completed meeting in Scottsdale, Arizona. The Connecticut Public Utilities Regulatory Authority vice-chair said he’s not surprised to see states act. Betkoski supported a Connecticut bill that passed one chamber before the session ended. “It will be back,” he said. In a Wednesday session, NARUC Telecom Committee Chairman Paul Kjellander said commissioners support a federal net neutrality law, but states are stepping up because Congress appears unlikely to act.