House Passes IP Charges Bill
by Elisa Batista
11:20 a.m. May. 16, 2000 PDT
wired.com
(Editor's note: This story, originally published May 16 at 3 a.m., has been
updated with the House approving the bill.)
In a move Internet users and advocates view as a "slippery slope" toward
government regulation of the medium, the House of Representatives
unanimously passed a bill Wednesday that allows the government to
impose per-minute charges for online voice services.
The Internet Access Charge Prohibition Act of 2000 originally was drafted
by Representative Fred Upton (R-Michigan) to permanently ban all federal
Internet access charges. But it was revised last week to exclude online
telephone services -- a decision Republican officials say was made to
appease members of the telecommunications industry who view online
telephony as competition.
com-notes.house.gov
Although telephony is the only Internet service singled
out, Internet user advocates emailed their
representatives Tuesday to criticize them for selling out
to telephone companies. They said any exception to the
access-charge ban is a loophole for future regulation of
the Internet.
"The problem is certain representatives are in the
pockets of telecommunication groups," said Jeff Pulver,
president of Pulver.com, an organization that promotes
the widespread use of Internet technology, including
telephony. "The telecommunication lobbyists are more
powerful than the tobacco and guns groups."
But House members who voted for the bill say that it
represents a victory over any federal agency that wants
to impose access charges. Technically, the government
can impose such charges for general Internet usage, not
just online phone services.
The bill's passage does not make it any easier for the
Federal Communications Commission to impose access
charges on online telephony, said Richard Diamond, a
spokesman for House Majority Leader Dick Armey, who
voted for the bill. "The FCC could do that with or without
this legislation," Diamond said.
Upton's spokesman Mike Waldron defended the bill for the
same reasons on Tuesday.
"I would say that our intention in this bill is to keep the
flow of data affordable and accessible to all Americans,"
Waldron said. "What we were looking at are people who
use the Internet for research, people who read their local
newspapers online, and email. In doing the research we
found that the per-minute charge would
disproportionately impact low-income families."
Waldron said the online telephone provision was created
to ensure the bill's passage, adding that there were too
many questions surrounding online voice services that
required an actual telephone for use.
"It's one of those complicated questions that doesn't
need to be settled right now," Waldron said. "The intent
of the amendment was to put the question off at a later
date ... for more discussion."
But another Republican official who asked not to be
identified said the online telephone provision was
necessary to stave off strong lobbying efforts by
telephone companies that have to comply with FCC
regulations and view free online telephony as
competition.
"It would be a huge fight," he said, adding that the
telecommunications industry has enough support on
Capitol Hill to make it difficult to pass an Internet
access-charge ban.
On Wednesday the same official said he doubts the
"FCC is stupid enough" to impose such charges,
especially since most House members do not support
any kind of Internet regulation.
If such charges are imposed "we will address that
issue and smack that down," he said.
A FCC spokesman said on Tuesday that the agency
has no plans to charge per-minute rates for online
telephone services regardless of the bill's approval.
"The FCC is interested in creating competition
wherever it can be created," he said.
Still, regulation-free Internet proponents have
launched what they labeled the "Million Nerd March,"
asking that users email their representatives to
voice their opposition to the bill.
"It's the first time I've emailed my representative,"
Pulver said. "I view this bill as counterproductive in
that the government will use it to regulate the
Internet."
Ken Rutkowski, a CNET radio host who has aired his
opposition to the bill, said he uses online telephone
services like those of AOL's ICQ daily.
"I do that without paying anything," he said.
The bill's passage follows the House's vote last
Thursday to extend an Internet tax-ban moratorium
until 2006. Under the Internet Discrimination Act,
local and state entities cannot impose taxes on the
Internet until next year. |
