Republican-sponsored H.R. 2666 — the “No Rate Regulation of Broadband Internet Access Act” — is drawing opposition from House Democrats because the measure, if it becomes law, could grant cable and telephone companies broad permanent exemption from oversight and consumer protection laws.
The bill, introduced last summer by Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), consists of a single sentence:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Federal Communications Commission may not regulate the rates charged for broadband Internet access service (as defined in the rules adopted in the Report and Order on Remand, Declaratory Ruling, and Order that was adopted by the Commission on February 26, 2015 (FCC 15–24)).
Democrats worry despite the brevity of the bill, its language is broad and sweeping, and could be interpreted by the courts to grant deregulation and freedom from oversight to telecommunications providers that already rank at the bottom of customer satisfaction scores. It would also undercut the FCC’s reclassification of broadband from an information service to a telecommunications service, subject to Title II regulations, which gave the FCC increased authority to oversee the broadband industry.
Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) has signaled her likely opposition to the Republican bill, noting the proposed law could “eviscerate the FCC’s authority to protect consumers against truth in billing practices and discriminatory data caps; to ensure broadband availability through [the Universal Service Fund] and E-Rate; to address rate-related issues in merger reviews; to ensure enforcement against paid prioritization; and other essential consumer protections.”
Several Democrats on the House Communications Subcommittee are introducing amendments that would likely keep Republican language prohibiting the FCC from directly regulating broadband prices, but also protect the power of the FCC to regulate billing practices, data caps and usage pricing, Net Neutrality, universal service requirements, merger reviews, and discriminatory and/or unfair business practices.
The Democrats are likely to have an uphill battle in a Republican-controlled House. Constituents may have more influence expressing their opposition to H.R. 2666 by reaching out to Rep. Kinzinger and the 18 Republican co-sponsors of the measure:
- Rep. Latta, Robert E. [R-Ohio]
- Rep. Bilirakis, Gus M. [R-Fla.]
- Rep. Barton, Joe [R-Tex.]
- Rep. Lance, Leonard [R-N.J.]
- Rep. Shimkus, John [R-Ill.]
- Rep. Blackburn, Marsha [R-Tenn.]
- Rep. Olson, Pete [R-Tex.]
- Rep. Pompeo, Mike [R-Kan.]
- Rep. Scalise, Steve [R-La.]
- Rep. Cramer, Kevin [R-N.D.]
- Rep. Collins, Chris [R-N.Y.]
- Rep. Long, Billy [R-Mo.]
- Rep. Guthrie, Brett [R-Ky.]
- Rep. Johnson, Bill [R-Ohio]
- Rep. Ellmers, Renee L. [R-N.C.]
- Rep. Walden, Greg [R-Ore.]
- Rep. Upton, Fred [R-Mich.]
- Rep. Allen, Rick W. [R-Ga.]
This could (and should be) a SIGNIFICANT ELECTION ISSUE. A direct attack on consumers via unregulated internet rates!
My note already in to my “representative”
So I have one thing only to say about this is that this isn’t all Republicans vs democrats, it is a small group, there many Republicans opposing this too
BUT: Those in favor of this are ALL REPUBLICANS!!
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1301/cosponsors
Read it and weep.
T. J.:
What is your point??? H.R. 1301 is an entirely different bill! It relates to restrictions on Amateur Radio towers. That is quite a different bill than the Republican bill (H.R. 2666) that gives Internet companies FREE REIGN TO INCREASE INTERNET RATES!!
Whoops, chose the wrong bill when going back thru, gotta love smart phones. Gotta get rid of this windows phone, my bad. Lol.
I wrote Rep. Bill Johnson asking him to reconsider his sponsorship of this anti-consumer bill, mentioning the artificial scarcity created by the price-gouging cable monopolies. I hope many others in Ohio, and the country, do the same thing.