The US Capitol Building.House of Representatives
The House of Representatives today approved a Republican proposal that limits the Federal Communications Commission's authority to regulate Internet providers.
The "No Rate Regulation of Broadband Internet Access Act" was ostensibly proposed to prevent the FCC from setting the rates charged by Internet providers.
But the bill defines "rate regulation" so broadly that FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler says it could prevent the commission from enforcing net neutrality rules against blocking and throttling. The FCC says it has no plans to impose strict utility rate regulation on Internet providers, but it can review whether specific rates are "unjust" or "unreasonable" under its authority to regulate common carriers.
This bill would remove that authority and could also limit the FCC's authority to prevent ISPs from applying data caps in discriminatory ways. The White House has already threatened to veto the bill, so it isn't likely to become law even if it passes the Senate. The vote today was mostly along party lines, with 241 representatives in favor and 173 against. The FCC's vote last year to reclassify Internet providers as common carriers and enforce net neutrality rules specifically rejected traditional rate regulation for broadband.
Despite that, US Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) said today, "We all know that what they'd like to do is regulate the Internet so they can tax the Internet, so they could then come in and set all the rates," according to the Associated Press. House Democrats argued against the bill to no avail, saying it would weaken the FCC's consumer protection authority. Industry groups representing Internet providers cheered the House's vote. "A stable regulatory framework that excludes price controls spurs greater investment in broadband networks," the American Cable Association said.
The lobby group for small and medium-sized cable companies said the bill codifies promises made by Wheeler and "shields the market from action taken in this area by future FCC leaders who might not feel bound by promises made by earlier FCC officials." CTIA, which represents wireless carriers, said the bill "will alleviate some of the risk to competition and investment created by the FCC's Open Internet Order." CenturyLink issued a statement expressing surprise "that there’s any opposition to this bill given that the administration has stated on multiple occasions that it is not interested in regulating broadband prices." Consumer advocacy group Public Knowledge warned that the bill's broad definition of rate regulation will have a major impact on the FCC's ability to protect consumers. "This bill redefines ‘rate regulation’ to mean any action that involves a rate, not simply the setting of a rate as is understood today by the general public and even the Supreme Court," Public Knowledge said. "This bill goes beyond the forbearances of the Wheeler-led FCC to eliminate the ability for the FCC to even review the reasonableness of a rate.
It is an invitation to monopoly level rates by ISPs, since few Americans have more than one or two choices for high-speed broadband."
But the bill defines "rate regulation" so broadly that FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler says it could prevent the commission from enforcing net neutrality rules against blocking and throttling. The FCC says it has no plans to impose strict utility rate regulation on Internet providers, but it can review whether specific rates are "unjust" or "unreasonable" under its authority to regulate common carriers.
This bill would remove that authority and could also limit the FCC's authority to prevent ISPs from applying data caps in discriminatory ways. The White House has already threatened to veto the bill, so it isn't likely to become law even if it passes the Senate. The vote today was mostly along party lines, with 241 representatives in favor and 173 against. The FCC's vote last year to reclassify Internet providers as common carriers and enforce net neutrality rules specifically rejected traditional rate regulation for broadband.
Despite that, US Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) said today, "We all know that what they'd like to do is regulate the Internet so they can tax the Internet, so they could then come in and set all the rates," according to the Associated Press. House Democrats argued against the bill to no avail, saying it would weaken the FCC's consumer protection authority. Industry groups representing Internet providers cheered the House's vote. "A stable regulatory framework that excludes price controls spurs greater investment in broadband networks," the American Cable Association said.
The lobby group for small and medium-sized cable companies said the bill codifies promises made by Wheeler and "shields the market from action taken in this area by future FCC leaders who might not feel bound by promises made by earlier FCC officials." CTIA, which represents wireless carriers, said the bill "will alleviate some of the risk to competition and investment created by the FCC's Open Internet Order." CenturyLink issued a statement expressing surprise "that there’s any opposition to this bill given that the administration has stated on multiple occasions that it is not interested in regulating broadband prices." Consumer advocacy group Public Knowledge warned that the bill's broad definition of rate regulation will have a major impact on the FCC's ability to protect consumers. "This bill redefines ‘rate regulation’ to mean any action that involves a rate, not simply the setting of a rate as is understood today by the general public and even the Supreme Court," Public Knowledge said. "This bill goes beyond the forbearances of the Wheeler-led FCC to eliminate the ability for the FCC to even review the reasonableness of a rate.
It is an invitation to monopoly level rates by ISPs, since few Americans have more than one or two choices for high-speed broadband."