Regulatory classification

The battle for network neutrality (aka the open internet) is back. It’s something that should have been instituted years ago. In fact, it actually was on the books—until then-President Donald Trump’s Federal Communications Commission Chairman, Ajit Pai, ditched the rules, largely at the behest of the big internet service providers like Verizon, AT&T and Comcast. Net neutrality rules were not only on the books, but were also court-approved. That should have been the end of the matter.

On October 17, 2023, Republican Members of the House Commerce Committee wrote to Federal Communications Commission Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel expressing their disappointment and opposition to the FCC opening a proceeding to reclassify fixed and mobile broadband as a telecommunications service under Title II of the Communications Act of 1934. On October 31, Chairwoman Rosenworcel replied saying "Everyone, everywhere in this country needs access to broadband to have a fair shot at 21st century success...

The Biden administration is fighting a two-front war in its campaign to re-regulate internet service providers (ISPs), fronts that opponents fear could include price regulation as ammunition. The Federal Communications Commission's Democratic majority voted on October 19, 2023 to propose reclassifying internet access as a Title II telecommunications service subject to some common-carrier regulations and to restore net neutrality rules.

There are so many exciting things happening in the digital equity space. However, as the title of my talk foreshadows—the road to digital equity is not always straight and it’s often bumpy. Over the past 3 and a half years especially, we have made great gains, only to suffer setbacks. And while I’m optimistic about the future, we are now in a critical moment in the effort to get everyone connected to affordable and robust broadband.

Senator Eric Schmitt (R-MO) sent a letter to Federal Communications Commission Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel to demand answers regarding the FCC’s partisan Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to reinstate failed Title II net neutrality rules. “As a member of the U.S.

Fans of Title II-based network neutrality rules are once again flooding the Federal Communications Commission’s net neutrality comment docket with identical calls for restoration of the rules, as the Democrat-controlled agency has proposed. The docket already has almost 20,000 comments and, as such, is the commission’s most active proceeding, far outstripping the second-place docket for rules on international communications and spectrum issues, which has less than 3,000.

On October 19, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted 3-2 to issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to reinstate the agency’s 2015 decision that brought internet service providers (ISPs) under the agency’s jurisdiction as Telecommunications Carriers. This action is necessary because the Trump FCC repealed the previous rule in 2018 at the request of the ISPs.

The House of Representatives will be led by Rep Mike Johnson, who represents Louisiana’s 4th district. A previous Chair of the Republican Study Committee and a Vice Chair of the House Republican Conference, Johnson has also served on the House Judiciary and Armed Services Committees. What could this mean for the Congressional broadband agenda? Speaker Johnson is largely in line with his Republican colleagues on most broadband issues.

The commissioners sitting on the Federal Communications Commission should issue a joint statement reminding the public that “the comment process is not a vote.” To my mind, inviting commenters to make some noise and raise a ruckus is not the proper way to encourage public participation most conducive to creating a rulemaking record consistent with the agency’s supposed expertise. To the extent that making noise and raising a ruckus is understood as gearing up the mass comment machines, the notion is devalued that the FCC will be applying its expertise in deciding complex issues—say, what co

Net neutrality has become the Washington equivalent of a Hollywood franchise: As if the sequel to the sequel weren’t enough, another installment of the debate over rules for the internet’s roads arrived this month. This time, however, there’s a plot twist. What, exactly, net neutrality rules look like matters less than that there are meaningful rules for broadband more generally.