Regulatory classification

As Congress considers a measure that would overturn the Federal Communications Commission’s vote that destroyed Network Neutrality and put the internet’s entire future at risk, all eyes are on Sen John Kennedy (R-LA). Right now that measure has 50 supporters in the Senate — and needs just one more vote to pass.

A consortium of public interest groups including Free Press report that at least 14 states have signed or introduced orders and bills seeking to enforce network neutrality, while seven states are considering them. Their first tactic has been to block Internet serivce providers wishing to do business with state governments. The governors of New York and Montana signed such executive orders this month blocking any ISPs that don’t meet net neutrality principles from publicly-funded contracts. Legislators in statehouses are drafting similar rules.

The California Senate approved legislation that would require Internet service providers (ISPs) in California to follow the now-repealed 2015 Open Internet Order. While well-intentioned, the legislators sadly chose an approach that is vulnerable to legal attack. 

Like network neutrality, publicly-owned broadband is a topic that’s often murky, as major players seek to establish their own set of facts and define the issue based on their own priorities. Outside cash, for or against, pours in to fight the issue.  Comcast, for its part, is a known contributor to industry associations that have put up large chunks of change to fight municipal broadband legislation at the grassroots level, such as in Fort Collins (CO) where city officials recently approved building out a municipal network.

Nicol Turner-Lee: One year into his presidency, President Donald Trump is planning to release the details of his $1.7 trillion infrastructure plan during the State of the Union. While the plan will fund the nation’s public works projects, the jury is still out on whether or not broadband infrastructure will be sufficiently covered, especially as it has become the nation’s next critical asset.

The California State Senate approved a bill to impose network neutrality restrictions on Internet service providers, challenging the Federal Communications Commission attempt to preempt such rules. The FCC is already being sued by 21 states and the District of Columbia, which are trying to reverse the net neutrality repeal and the preemption of state laws. Attempts to enforce net neutrality rules at the state or local level could end up being challenged in separate lawsuits.

House Commerce Committee Chairman Greg Walden (R-OR) appeared at the State of the Net conference for a wide-ranging discussion with former Federal Communications Commission Commissioner Robert McDowell on broadband infrastructure, Net Neutrality, 5G, and more. Chairman Walden said, “A government that can’t protect the data of its own employees, I struggle with the notion it’s going to run a complete architecture and network that will be hack-free.

[Commentary] Network neutrality advocates have found some new allies in their efforts to combat the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) Restoring Internet Freedom Order: state governments. But ultimately, these initiatives are likely to be more symbolic than substantial. While the Communications Act gives states a significant role in telecommunications regulation, both the statute and broader constitutional doctrines limit the ability of a single state (or even a group of states) to dictate national policy.

Even the largest internet service providers say customers won’t see their service affected because of the [network neutrality] rule change. 

On Jan 19, 2018, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai responded to various Members of Congress regarding the Restoring Internet Freedom Proceeding, who had raised concerns over the FCC's handling of the 50,000 informal complaints from the National Hispanic Media Coalition's FOIA request.