Inouye Leads Minority Opposing Telecom Bill
The Senate telecom bill (HR-5252) would boost competition -- but only by “eviscerating important consumer protections,” said 3 Democrats in a long-awaited bill report filed Fri. The 5-1/2 page objection to the bill cites weak net neutrality regulation, lack of a buildout mandate for video providers and other criticisms. It was written by Senate Commerce Committee Ranking Member Inouye (D-Hawaii) and Sens. Dorgan (D-N.D.) and Boxer (D-Cal.).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
“Without significant improvements to the current bill on these key issues, we cannot support further consideration of this legislation,” the report authors said. In their dissent, the senators said they have “substantial concerns with core sections of the bill.” The day the report was released, Sen. Vitter (R-La.) plugged the bill on the Senate floor, saying it was time to bring it up for debate and a vote. “Some of our colleagues are holding up this important bill,” Vitter said.
Meanwhile, the Congressional Budget Office said the bill would cost taxpayers $5.2 billion during 2007-2016. If the amounts the bill authorizes were appropriated, CBO said, the bill would require “discretionary outlays” of $175 million from 2007-2011. Discretionary spending is controlled by the appropriations process set by Congress and the president, in contrast to spending required by programs such as Medicare and Social Security.
CBO based its estimates on items needing funding: A new Universal Service Fund program would support rural broadband deployment and research grants for advanced communications services. The bill contains intergovernmental mandates that would exceed an Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) threshold, CBO said. Costs, in the form of lost revenue, could hit $400 million yearly; UMRA’s threshold is $64 million, adjusted annually for inflation.
Triggering UMRA could make the bill vulnerable to a point of order on the Senate floor, according to a CBO spokeswoman. Telecom lobbyists said the CBO cost estimate has bill backers worried, since the House version of the bill hadn’t raised any flags. “This is not helpful,” said a lobbyist who handles wireless issues. In a May cost estimate of the House version of the bill, CBO said it would have no “significant effect” on federal spending.
The bill’s mandates for state and local govts. include permanently barring state and local taxing of Internet access services and a 3-year moratorium on new state and local taxes on cellphone service. The bill also would keep govts. from imposing certain fees on providers of cable services. Besides public sector mandates, the bill would impose “numerous private sector mandates” exceeding UMRA’s annual threshold, CBO said. The 2006 threshold is $128 million, adjusted for inflation.