Save Access

from: National Journal
Technology Daily

Panel Progresses On Telecom Bill; ‘Network Neutrality’ Is Next Up

By Drew Clark

(Tuesday, June 27) Meeting in an all-day markup, the Senate Commerce Committee plowed through dozens of amendments to telecommunications overhaul legislation authored by Commerce Chairman Ted Stevens, R-Alaska -- but deferred action on the most controversial items until Wednesday.

The major showdown is over the so-called network neutrality, which involves whether the Bell telecommunications companies and cable operators should be permitted to discriminate among content providers in terms of delivery speed. Stevens deferred the “net neutrality” debate matter until the very end of the markup, probably Wednesday afternoon.

"This bill will pass in September, if it passes at all," Stevens said at the close of Tuesday's six-hour session, looking ahead to possible Senate floor action on the legislation. And, he noted, in order to secure time on the Senate floor, “we have to have 60 votes; we don’t have them right now” – referring to the supermajority needed to head off a possible filibuster.

In comments after the markup, Stevens – who is at odds with the proponents of strict network neutrality – cited that as the issue with the greatest chance to torpedo the legislation.

Wednesday's committee showdown over net neutrality is likely to play out over three amendments to be offered by Sens. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, and Byron Dorgan, D-N.D. The first of these reflects legislation sponsored by Snowe and Dorgan which would bar network operators – such as the Bells and cable firms --from charging preferred businesses for speedier Internet service.

The Bells and Bell and cable companies vehemently oppose this language, which is being pushed by a number of major technology companies and public interest groups from both ends of the ideological spectrum..

If their first amendment fails, Snowe and Dorgan have two fallback positions, according to technology industry sources.

One such fallback amendment would add anti-discrimination language to the net neutrality provisions contained in the telecom overhaul bill that cleared the House earlier this month. The House-passed legislation gives the FCC the ability to stop Bell and cable companies from blocking Web sites, but not from charging content providers differing prices for different delivery speeds.

The second Snowe-Dorgan fallback position would modify the network neutrality language now in the Stevens-authored bill. The Stevens language proposes to ban network operators from restricting consumer access to Web sites based on the political viewpoints of the latter.

Adding the principle of non-discrimination as an amendment to Stevens' language "would go a long way to achieving" network neutrality sought by the technology industry, said Gerard Waldron, an attorney who represents the “It’s Our Net” coalition – which includes such major tech firms as Amazon, eBay, Google, InterActive Corp., Microsoft, and Yahoo in the "Its Our Net" coalition.

"We don't know where the votes are, and the other side doesn't either, which makes for a very interesting markup," said Waldron.

As the Commerce Committee plowed through nine of the Stevens bill’s 10 titles Tuesday, also deferred until today was an amendment by Sens. John Kerry, D-Mass., and Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., that would require new entrants into video services to “build out” service to all neighborhoods within a given franchise area.

During Tuesday’s session, the panel adopted a manager’s amendment introduced by Stevens that included significant changes in the bill’s video franchising provisions; these changes were made in the hope of answering objections from municipalities.

Local officials have been reluctant to accept the key purpose of the bill's video franchising title -- to allow Bell companies quick entry into the pay-television marketplace by circumventing the local franchise review process. The House-passed bill contains language that would grant the Bells a nationwide franchise.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., is planning to introduce an amendment to grant franchise liberalization to video providers that offer channels on a so-called a la carte basis, as opposed to the programming packages now offered by cable operators.

While the committee Tuesday rejected many Democratic-sponsored amendments, Stevens agreed to work with senators from both parties on issues ranging from consumer protection to limiting the size of the universal service fund as the measure moves toward the floor. The universal service fund, through subsidies, helps to provide affordable telecom service to low-income and rural Americans.

Sen. John Sununu, R-N.H., did not offer an anticipated amendment to strike out the anti-piracy "broadcast flag" provisions of the bill, but vowed to bring up the issue up on the Senate floor.