WASHINGTON-As one House committee passed a pro-network neutrality bill, another bill with weaker network-neutrality provisions from a different committee awaits House action, setting up a fight over how to govern the information highway.
Network neutrality has emerged as the key battleground for telecommunications-reform legislation with nothing less than the future of the Internet at stake. Proponents believe that a two-tiered Internet would stifle innovation and opponents believe they need to operate their networks as they see fit.
While the vote in the House Judiciary Committee was overwhelming in favor of the pro-network neutrality bill, members of the committee seemed to vote more on the jurisdictional question than on the substance of the argument. The House Judiciary Committee believes network neutrality can be monitored, regulated and enforced using antitrust principles. Thus Judiciary committee leadership was furious when the House Commerce Committee dealt with the issue by giving enforcement authority to the Federal Communications Commission.
“We all know the FCC is a moss pit-nothing can happen there,” said Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee.
One apparently conflicted member, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), voted for the bill after questioning whether network neutrality was really freeloading.
“Not all broadband Internet providers are necessarily in the same situation, with the same business models with the same market penetration. It is one thing to log onto your computer at home and want to travel to any lawful Web site easily, it is another situation if you are Verizon and you develop a wireless technology that will allow users to download content to their cell phones and you have invested a lot of capital to make that happen and then you have to provide that to everyone else and allow them to piggyback on your investment. So this is really tough-what is really open access and what is freeloading?” asked Schiff.
Now that the bill has passed the House Judiciary Committee, Chairman Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), and Conyers are expected to fight to have it offered as an amendment to the House Commerce Committee bill when it is debated on the floor.
The House Commerce Committee bill gives the commission authority to adjudicate complaints that the FCC’s broadband policy had been violated, but does not allow the agency to turn that policy into a regulation.
“The way the House Commerce Committee (bill) is written, it is to close out this committee and frankly most Americans from adjudicating complaints,” said Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.).
Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.), ranking member of the House telecommunications subcommittee, tried unsuccessfully at both the subcommittee and the House Commerce Committee level to strengthen the network-neutrality provisions.
While the House judiciary panel was voting for network neutrality, the Senate Commerce Committee was being praised by Verizon Communications Inc. The Senate telecommunications-reform bill only requires a study of network neutrality.
“We applaud the sensible approach you have taken in this legislation on the subject of net neutrality. Common sense is needed, because, simply put, net-neutrality legislation endangers both the future of video choice and the accelerated broadband investment that is just beginning to gain traction. In our view, the proposal put forward by the more extreme and aggressive proponents of net neutrality really comes down to one thing: government regulation of the Internet,” said Tom Tauke, Verizon executive vice president. R
