Free Press Policy Director Matt Wood will also testify before Congress on wireless competition issues. The Senate Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee scheduled a hearing Wednesday at 10 a.m. in 226 Dirksen, initially naming Verizon Communications Executive Vice President-Public Policy Randal Milch, Mobile Future Chairman Jonathan Spalter, T-Mobile Senior Vice President-Government Relations Tom Sugrue and C Spire Wireless Senior Vice President-Strategic Relations Eric Graham as witnesses. The Senate Judiciary website shows Wood has been added to the list (http://1.usa.gov/1hCksm0).

The Comcast-Time Warner Cable deal has become a campaign issue in Democratic Sen. Al Franken’s fight to win reelection in Minnesota this November. He highlighted media consolidation concerns on his campaign website and launched an informal poll asking people about their cable service and how satisfied they are (http://bit.ly/1nTJVFl). “Are you concerned that the Comcast-Time-Warner deal would result in higher prices and/or worse service for you?” the poll asks, giving an option for people to tell Franken what they think about the proposed deal. His campaign Facebook page urged people to share the poll “if you're concerned about skyrocketing cable rates.” The campaign website also included a press release highlighting how Franken recently told CNN the proposed acquisition would be “going exactly in the wrong direction” and that consumers would face “even worse service and less choice” if it’s approved (http://bit.ly/1gRWyjF). His campaign issues page said Franken “has taken a leadership role in opposing the recent trend towards media consolidation -- fighting against mergers that would lead to less choice and higher prices for Minnesota consumers carefully watching their cable, Internet, and cell phone bills” (http://bit.ly/1fFDfGo). Franken is a member of the Senate Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee, which has said it plans a hearing on the deal. A spokeswoman for Franken’s Senate campaign told us Franken is “very concerned” about consumer impact and “will continue to ask tough question about what it will mean for cable bills and customer service.”

The House will likely have a floor vote this week on HR-1123, the Unlocking Consumer Choice and Wireless Competition Act, which House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., introduced last year. It’s scheduled for a vote this week (http://1.usa.gov/1jRD6DM), and a House Judiciary spokeswoman said it will likely be Tuesday. But Public Knowledge revoked its support, citing a perceived failure in the latest version of the five-page bill (http://1.usa.gov/1dbtwH2) unveiled last week. “The amended version fails to address the flawed law at the root of the unlocking problem: the anti-circumvention provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act,” said Public Knowledge Vice President-Legal Affairs Sherwin Siy in a statement (http://bit.ly/1jlhlwr). “The new language specifically excluding bulk unlocking could indicate that the drafters believe that phone unlocking has something to do with copyright law.” Public Knowledge does not see this as a copyright problem and now favors the Unlocking Technology Act (HR-1892), from Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif. Goodlatte’s bill lists 10 co-sponsors, including Lofgren. Responding to a press question about Public Knowledge’s concerns, a Republican committee aide told us the Goodlatte legislation was never intended to tackle the broader issues Public Knowledge wants. “Our focus has really been on individual cellphone unlocking,” the aide said. The bill’s new language doesn’t say that bulk unlocking is bad or add penalties for that -- the bill simply doesn’t address the question, the aide said. Those issues will likely be addressed in the broader copyright review House Judiciary has embarked on, he said. No other members’ offices or other stakeholders have objected to the latest bill text so far, the aide said, although he pointed out Congress is out on recess.

Questions for journalists and news directors that had been part of the research design for the FCC’s critical information needs (CIN) studies have been removed at the direction of FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler, and the study has been on hold while being reviewed and redesigned, the FCC said Friday. The portion of the study questioning what news stories broadcasters cover had drawn ire in the form of a December letter from Republicans (CD Dec 11 p11), including subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden of Oregon and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton of Michigan and a Wall Street Journal op-ed from Commissioner Ajit Pai (CD Feb 13 p1). Wheeler “agreed that survey questions in the study directed toward media outlet managers, news directors, and reporters overstepped the bounds of what is required,” said a statement from the FCC. In a reply letter sent to lawmakers (http://bit.ly/1fi15gi) Wheeler said the FCC “has no intention of regulating political or other speech of journalists or broadcasters.” The Columbia, S.C., pilot of the draft study “will not be undertaken until a new study design is final,” the FCC release said. “Any subsequent market studies conducted by the FCC, if determined necessary, will not seek participation from or include questions for media owners, news directors or reporters.” In a statement, Pai said he welcomed the study’s suspension. “This study would have thrust the federal government into newsrooms across the country, somewhere it just doesn’t belong,” he said. The FCC “has now recognized that no study by the federal government, now or in the future, should involve asking questions to media owners, news directors, or reporters about their practice,” Pai said.

Academics will testify Feb. 28 about their opinions of the FTC’s jurisdiction before the House Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing and Trade, said a Friday release. It’s part of the subcommittee’s ongoing hearings about the FTC during its 100th anniversary. The series started in December when all four FTC commissioners testified (CD Dec 4 p5). A witness list wasn’t announced.

Representatives of major carriers will testify before Congress on wireless competition issues. The Senate Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee announced it will hold a hearing on the topic, taking place Wednesday at 10 a.m. in 226 Dirksen. Witnesses are Verizon Communications Executive Vice President-Public Policy Randal Milch, Mobile Future Chairman Jonathan Spalter, T-Mobile Senior Vice President-Government Relations Thomas Sugrue and C Spire Wireless Senior Vice President-Strategic Relations Eric Graham. Subcommittee Chairwoman Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., will preside over the hearing, and she told us recently she planned to hold a subcommittee hearing before month’s end focused on whether carriers should be required to include a kill switch on wireless phones to disable a stolen device. She has introduced legislation to that end, which CTIA has criticized.

Senate Communications Subcommittee ranking member Roger Wicker, R-Miss., joined the chorus of Republicans lamenting the FCC’s intentions to reinstate net neutrality rules (CD Feb 20 p1). “It is unfortunate that the Commission is again attempting to impose unnecessary net neutrality rules,” Wicker said in a statement Wednesday night. “Further, reserving the option of applying outdated Title II regulations to modern technologies through ‘reclassification’ will only add uncertainty to the marketplace and stifle innovation. I question whether [FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler’s] proposals are in consumers’ best interests."

Two House Democrats pressed the Justice Department on the use of National Security Letters (NSLs), which allow the FBI to access phone records and other information without judicial findings. They questioned DOJ on how NSLs related to Patriot Act Section 215 phone surveillance requests. “Presumably, anything that the government can obtain through an NSL it can also obtain through a Section 215 order from the FISA court,” wrote Reps. Jerry Nadler of New York and David Cicilline of Rhode Island in a letter released Thursday (http://1.usa.gov/1nRc4g2). “Given the overlap with Section 215, why are NSLs necessary?” They want to know how many NSLs have been issued and under what authorities since 2006, among other inquiries. They request answers to several questions by March 7.

The FCC has “no intention of regulating political or other speech of journalists or Broadcasters” through its Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs or otherwise, but the agency may tweak its design to reflect concerns, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler told House Republicans (http://1.usa.gov/1jNiYT2). They had written a letter voicing concerns in December, and Wheeler responded according to a letter released Thursday. Wheeler defended the study as fulfilling a Communications Act Section 257 obligation. An FCC official had told us earlier this month, before Wheeler sent the Feb. 14 letter, that Wheeler’s office was developing a new draft of the study (CD Feb 13 p1). “The statutory provision expressly links our obligation to identify market barriers with the responsibility to ‘promote the policies and purposes of this chapter favoring diversity of media voices,'” Wheeler said. “Your letter and the opportunity for public review surfaced a number of issues and modification of the Research Design may be necessary. My staff has engaged in a careful and thorough review of the Research Design with the contractor to ensure that the inquiries closely hew to the mandate of Section 257.” Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton, R-Mich., and Communications Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore., applauded Wheeler for recognizing “the gravity of our concerns” but said it “is imperative that the FCC ensure that any study, with any agents acting on its behalf, stays out of newsrooms” (http://1.usa.gov/1cuV2lU). They don’t want the FCC to revive the Fairness Doctrine, they said. The FCC plans to complete its study design tweaks “in the next few weeks,” Wheeler said. “As the revisions that we may implement likely will require cost reassessments, we will provide you with further details regarding cost and methodology as soon as they are available.”

Any FCC attempt to fix its own processes doesn’t erase a need to enact legislation to that end, said House Communications Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore., in a statement Tuesday. He weighed in on a set of FCC process review recommendations the agency released Friday (CD Feb 18 p7) and touted the FCC Process Reform Act, which cleared the House Commerce Committee in December. “I am pleased that many of the recommendations of the working group are so closely aligned with those contained in HR-3675 and look forward to their implementation,” Walden said (http://1.usa.gov/O9TyVK). “However, without enshrining these reforms in statute, their future will always be at the whim of whomever may be appointed chair. We owe it to the American people to enact laws that work on their behalf, and the FCC Process Reform Act certainly meets that test.” Sen. Dean Heller, R-Nev., recently introduced the bill in the Senate.