WASHINGTON—The House Commerce Committee released a draft of its communications bill, a somewhat limited piece of legislation that focuses on franchising efforts, but does not address some key areas of telecom reform.
The measure does not address universal service or federal pre-emption of wireless telephony. It would require Voice over Internet Protocol providers to offer enhanced 911 services, but would not give VoIP providers or public-safety answering points liability protections. It contains a network-neutrality provision but only allows the Federal Communications Commission to adjudicate disputes—not regulate network neutrality.
“The measure does not contain any universal-service provisions, which we believe is key to any bill’s being approved by the Senate,” wrote Stifel Nicolaus & Co. in a note to investors Tuesday morning. “The 34-page draft is much less sweeping than previous committee drafts of 70 pages and 77 pages on broader telecom reforms for the broadband/Internet age, though it does also contain provisions that address (in less detail) broadband network neutrality, VoIP 911 interconnection rights and duties, and municipal broadband. It does not contain new regulatory categories that the previous draft had on ‘broadband Internet transmission service (BITS) and ‘broadband video services.”
The Communications Opportunity, Promotion and Enhancement Act of 2006 is essentially a rewrite of existing laws governing the cable industry to allow wireline telephone companies, especially AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc., national franchise authority.
Three additional areas of the bill include the network-neutrality adjudication provisions, obligations to provide VoIP E-911 and a prohibition against states restricting municipalities from offering broadband.
Network neutrality generally refers to the ability to run any lawful application or connect any lawful device to the communications network. For content providers, it means not being required to pay pipe owners to have their content carried or given priority.
“We are pleased that the committee draft included language recognizing the importance of keeping the Internet open to all consumers. However, we do not believe that the draft bill goes far enough. The provisions will not stop the cable and telephone companies from degrading Internet traffic and they do not contain strong enough penalties to discourage misbehavior. Without stronger legislation, the cable and telephone companies will have the power to change the fundamental nature of the Internet. This bill needs significant improvements before it will preserve the open Internet that consumers and service providers expect and deserve,” said Gigi Sohn, president of Public Knowledge, a public-interest advocacy group specializing in intellectual property and technology policy.
Advocates like Public Knowledge argue that a specific network-neutrality law is necessary. The telecommunications and cable companies insist that since a problem does not exist, a law is not necessary.
Last August, the FCC issued a broadband policy statement that included network-neutrality language. The draft bill would allow entities that fear those policies have been violated to complain to the commission. The agency could not turn its policy statement into a specific regulation.
Last May, the FCC required VoIP operators to provide E-911 service by the end of November. Many did not make the deadline. One roadblock is the lack of liability protection that wireline and wireless carriers enjoy and PSAPs have when handling wireline and wireless 911 calls. Previous VoIP E-911 legislation contained the liability protection.
The House Commerce Committee plans to hold a hearing on the draft legislation Thursday morning.
