« Reminder: ONLY ONE MORE DAY to File Comments on our Post-Disaster Communications Petition | Main | Alyssa Milano and Me... »

April 26, 2006

Parallel Universes or a House Divided Among Itself: -- the Turf War Begins: Commerce Committee vs. Judiciary Committee

The House Judiciary Committee Task Force on Telecom and Antitrust held an Oversight Hearing on "Network Neutrality: Competition, Innovation and Nondiscriminatory Access." It was a world away from the Hearings and Markups we have experienced in the House Commerce Committee in the past few weeks.

Does Judiciary offer us a glimpse of a better world? I'm inclined to say yes. Others might disagree. It, however, is hard to believe that these two Committees represent the same constituency, the same country. How could two adjoining Committees suggest two such radically different policy results? The Commerce Committee is large predisposed against Net Neutrality. It was hard to find a harsh sentiment towards Net Neutrality in Judiciary. In fact, the Judiciary Hearing was, for the most part, a total dogpile on Walter McCormick, the President of USTA, the trade association for the Bell Companies and other ILECs. As best we could tell, virtually all the members, across the aisle in Judiciary, were generally inclined towards ensuring a competitive marketplace, and using competition to drive innovation.

The Judiciary Hearing was not accessible via the House's videocast. Ironic? I know I am just being paranoid, but I was forced to wonder who controls the Judiciary Committee's videofeed. Was there some sort of blocking, impairment or degradation of service -- or, what do they call it these days, packet prioritization (to put a positive spin on the inability of anti-Bell sentiment reaching the Internet)? In any event, it was apparently pretty difficult for the outside world to witness, in real time, the beating that the Internet access providers took in the Judiciary Committee Hearing room.

Then, there was a wake up call when the Commerce Committee began opening statements on the COPE Bill at 5pm down the hall in the Commerce Committee Hearing room. The House Markup continues tomorrow morning, and, I guess, the writing is on the wall - the COPE Bill will likely sail through Committee and the Net Neutrality amendment will likely fail. I suspect that the Net Neutrality amendment would pass overwhelmingly in the Judiciary Committee. By the way, I think that Commerce Committee Markup was readily viewable via videocast.

It was suggested by one advocate, that if the Judiciary Committee were the Committee with original jurisdiction over communications policy, than the Bells would have won the day in Judiciary, and lost in Commerce, as the Commerce Committee vied for some authority. Maybe. ...But, I also suspect that the Bells and other established players would have more control over the Commerce Committee under any circumstances. Judiciary did seem generally less inclined to bow to industry lobbying tactics and more inclined to push for the right policy result. The probing of the panelists to get beyond the rhetoric was actually quite ennobling and reassuring. It made me think our Republic had some capacity to search for the right result rather than force the best interest of the most powerful constituency. But I think this Hearing was more of teaser of what could be in a better parallel universe. The Judiciary Hearing seemed more like an experiment, a glimpse of what could be if industry lobbyists did not wield so much sway in Congress.

What is clear is that there is a brewing turf war between Commerce and Judiciary, and Judiciary made a strong case today for jurisdiction over issues implicating Net Neutrality. I suspect House leadership might have to weigh in at some point soon.

The Commerce Committee Mark-up will resume today (Wednesday morning). We expect some more wrangling over Net Neutrality, with a strong amendment to save and advance the Open Internet. We also expect a few amendments and discussion on E911 and disability access obligations for VoIP providers.

It is still not too late for us to play a positive role in the outcome.

This is still a marathon and we are still in the first few miles. A Bill may not even pass through the Senate this year, let alone reach conference. Which means we still have time to influence the debate, to win the hearts and minds of Congress and the public. I don't know all the tools we have to participate in the battle. We should probably hold another Internet Freedom Rally on the steps of the Capitol (I have already hosted two in prior years when the Internet was in jeopardy and I am willing and inspired to host another). We should also find the right way to channel the Internet with viral ads demonstrating what the Internet could be under the right policy framework ensuring Internet Freedom and Consumer Empowerment. I guess we have to stop dwelling on what we could do and just start doing. Once again, I ask you to spread the word and send us your viral video or other ads, and compete for cash and epic glory in our "Save the Net" contest.


Tags: , , ,

(c) 2006 Jeff Pulver. All Rights Reserved.
(This blog posting is copyright protected by Jeff Pulver. Portions of this blog posting may be quoted or abstracted if attributed.)

Share this post:

Digg | del.icio.us | Reddit | Newsvine | Google Bookmark | Yahoo MyWeb | StumbleUpon

Posted by jeff on April 26, 2006 06:34 AM | Permalink

Additional resources: Watch PrimeTime TV Shows | Watch the Jeff Pulver Show | Jeff's Qik Videos

Comments

One small correction to what is otherwise an excellent overview of the Judiciary Committee's task force meeting on Tuesday:

"The Judiciary Hearing was not accessible via the House's videocast....it was apparently pretty difficult for the outside world to witness, in real time, the beating that the Internet access providers took in the Judiciary Committee Hearing room."

The entire hearing was broadcast live on C-SPAN 3 and is available online. Go to the C-SPAN home page, use the word "neutrality" in the search box, and it should be the first returned result. Watch the fun unravel.

Posted by: John Anderson at April 27, 2006 06:08 PM

Post a comment




Remember Me?