Rewrite of Telecom Act Could Depend on Net Neutrality Case, STELA Integration, Hill Staffers Say
Many agree the Telecom Act of 1996 is out of date, but whether Congress attempts a rewrite anytime soon will come down to one question, said speakers at a Practising Law Institute event Thursday: “Can we make it better, or will we make it worse?” One consideration is whether the weight of a rewrite can be carried by the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act (STELA), which Congress must deal with by its expiration at the end of 2014 (CD Nov 2 p5). Congress is also watching the net neutrality appeal closely to see what the courts think about the FCC’s authority over the Internet, speakers said.
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.
STELA is the only upcoming “must pass” piece of telecom legislation, and that’s where the rewrite debate will start, said Neil Fried, senior telecom counsel to the House Commerce Committee. The hearings around STELA will determine whether there’s consensus over the Telecom Act changes to be made, and how long it will take, he said. If a rewrite will take more than two years, it won’t happen with STELA, he said.
John Branscome, aide to Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., said he’s not sure STELA could “withstand the weight of a greater rewrite.” Four values must “inform any debate” about a rewrite, he said: public safety, consumer protection, universal service and competition. “Senator Rockefeller is willing to lead as chairman of the Commerce Committee, but I think he needs to know what needs to be fixed,” Branscome said, saying there’s no question technology has changed dramatically since 1996, but Rockefeller isn’t interested in doing a rewrite “just for a rewrite’s sake.” Branscome said his office would be watching the net neutrality case closely.
"It boils down to the net neutrality debate,” said David Quinalty, deputy staff director on the Senate Commerce Committee. How can Congress “break down the silos” of the various types of technologies that have emerged, and come up with a “meaningful rational framework,” if it can’t settle what the FCC’s regulatory role will be over broadband, he asked. There are extensive political ramifications to any Telecom Act rewrite, he said, and getting both sides of the Hill to agree on how the FCC should move forward could be a big problem. Quinalty noted that Congress could also amend the law in various places without doing a “fundamental rewrite."
Speakers discussed the FirstNet public safety broadband network. There’s a “hope” that eventually it could accommodate “mission critical voice” applications, Branscome said, noting there’s money in the Public Safety Spectrum Act to fund research for voice over LTE. Originally the House had anticipated a “larger role for the states,” said Fried. The public safety grants which are currently “in limbo” were originally paid for by the broadband stimulus, he said. “We do want to see a significant state role,” and there is a “conundrum” over why there has been a “stutter, start, stop” in the availability of grant money, he said. The question for states will be how to get their existing facilities into whatever system FirstNet is going to build, he said: That’s why there’s a debate over Broadband Technology Opportunities Program funding, and how states that are “no longer in the driver’s seat” are going to pay for this. Quinalty said the hope is that public safety agencies can transition away from land mobile radio systems, apply those costs toward wireless broadband networks, and end up spending less than they do now.