Save Access

Note: The Baldwin/Wilson Amendment (Do No Harm) which would have protected PEG centers receiving more than 1% in local franchises was voted DOWN by the Rules Committee. This makes COPE unacceptable to PEG Centers nationwide.

from: National Journal
CongressDaily

'Net Neutrality' Question To Get House Floor Vote

By Susan Davis and Drew Clark

(Revised Thursday, June 8) The full House will get a chance to debate and vote on the so-called network neutrality controversy later this week, as the House Rules Committee -- which sets the guidelines for floor debates -- announced late Wednesday that backers of stronger net neutrality provisions would be allowed to try to amend the pending telecom bill when it reaches the floor.

House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., earlier Wednesday had indicated that network neutrality amendments to the pending telecommunications overhaul bill -- amendments authored by Judiciary Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., and Energy and Commerce Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee ranking member Edward Markey, D-Mass. -- likely would be allowed a floor vote when the bill comes to the floor later this week.

"Yes, a piece of that will get a vote," Hastert told reporters when asked about network neutrality language written by Sensenbrenner that is at odds with telecom legislation approved by the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

When pressed on the Sensenbrenner and Markey amendments -- each of which is intended to prohibit the Bell telecommunications companies and cable TV companies from charging businesses to allow speedier Internet delivery to preferred customers -- Hastert replied, "One of those amendments will be on the floor, if not both of them."

The Rules Committee later announced that the Markey amendment, but not the Sensenbrenner amendment, would be permitted during the floor debate.

The Markey amendment was defeated on a 33-22 largely partisan vote in late April when the Energy and Commerce Committee debated the telecom bill. The Sensenbrenner amendment contains language approved 20-13 in late May in the Judiciary Committee -- although that victory was made possible largely by Democratic support, with only a minority of the Republicans on the committee backing Sensenbrenner's plan.

Meanwhile, in another boost for advocates of network neutrality, Senate Commerce Chairman Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, said he would change his pending telecom bill -- due for committee markup June 20 -- to clarify "that the FCC should be involved in net neutrality that affects consumers and the competitive market."

Speaking to reporters after a speech to the National Cable and Telecommunications Association, Stevens said of his planned revision: "That is a major change, in my opinion. It is reshuffling who is going to deal with net neutrality, and that is important." Stevens' current bill merely requires the FCC to study the subject.

Network neutrality has emerged as the most contentious issue in the debate over the telecommunications measure, which now contains provisions expediting the Bells' entry into the video services market by granting them nationwide franchises.

Strict rules that would bar Bell and cable companies from charging preferred business for speedier Internet delivery are being sought by advocacy groups on both the left and the right -- along with such leading tech sector firms as eBay, Google, Microsoft and Yahoo.

But the Bells and cable firms, joined by free market groups, call the proposed rules an unwarranted intervention into the Internet. Until Hastert's comments Wednesday, there had been speculation the House GOP leadership might block the net neutrality issue from coming to the floor -- to avoid their rank and file from getting caught in the middle of a battle between rival sets of powerful interests in an election year.

House Energy and Commerce Chairman Joe Barton, R-Texas, who has engaged in a turf war with Sensenbrenner over the telecom overhaul legislation, clearly was not pleased with the prospect of allowing floor votes on the net neutrality amendments.

"We are in discussions with the leadership and the stakeholders on what amendments, if any, will be made in order, but I think it's safe to say that the Sensenbrenner-Markey forces have gotten a black eye every time they've tried to bring their ideas up," Barton declared Wednesday morning–referring to the defeat of the Markey amendment when it was brought before the Energy and Commerce panel in late April.

As now written, the Energy and Commerce-approved bill would bar Bell and cable companies from blocking competitors' traffic. Network neutrality advocates contend this does not go far enough.