How and to what extent the FCC should regulate the internet has been a hot question for years, and the present administration is proposing to eliminate the..
How and to what extent the FCC should regulate internet access has been a hot question for years, and the present administration holds opposite views than the previous one, resulting in a proposal to eliminate 2015’s Open Internet Order. But Congress isn’ t going to take that lying down: 10 Representatives who helped craft the law governing the FCC itself have submitted an official comment on the proposal ruthlessly dismantling it.
You can check out the full comment here (PDF) ; at under 20 pages and written in a layman-friendly manner, it’s an easy Sunday read. It’s signed by 10 Members of Congress, including Frank Pallone, Jr (D-NJ) and Mike Doyle (D-PA) , ranking members of the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
As background, it’s important to know that the FCC’s proposal to eliminate the net neutrality rules from 2015 largely rests on reversing a decision made then that categorized broadband as a “telecommunications service” rather than an “information service.”
The rationale for this is fundamentally unsound, as I and many others have pointed out, and basically treats ISPs as if they are providing the services actually provided by the likes of Google and Facebook. The FCC is well within its rights to interpret the law, and it doesn’ t have to listen to contrary comments from the likes you and me.
It does, however, have to listen to Congress — “congressional intent” is a huge factor in determining whether an interpretation of the law is reasonable. And in the comment they’ ve just filed, Representatives Pallon, Doyle et al. make it very clear that their intent was and remains very different from how the FCC has chosen to represent it. Here’s the critical part:
Pretty unambiguous, right?
In addition to clarifying Congressional intent in the Telecommunications Act, the letter addresses some shortcomings in the FCC’s proposal, mainly in its choice of data used to justify itself.
It takes the agency to task for failing to consider overwhelming popular support for net neutrality, and for relying heavily on the metric of industry investment (itself a complex and contested issue) , and on its own admittedly flawed broadband deployment to support revoking the existing rules.
Lastly, the letter suggests that the FCC may have inappropriately taken direction from the Executive:
Ironically, one of Pai’s go-to criticisms of the 2015 rules is that they were influenced by President Obama’s White House.
There’s more to the letter, so feel free to give it a read. And be sure to refresh (and potentially help update) our guide to arguments against net neutrality.
