H.R. 1542 Dead in the Water?
isp-planet.com
The House Judiciary Committee reported unfavorably on a bill Wednesday that would have unleashed regional bell operating companies from regulatory review on DSL services. The committee raised serious antitrust concerns.
by Patricia Fusco
ISP-Planet Managing Editor
[June 14, 2001]
Does this mean that we toss dirt on the grave of the controversial piece of legislation that has come to be known as the Tauzin-Dingell bill?
Not exactly.
The House Energy and Commerce Committee first passed H.R. 1542 with a 32-23 vote in May. H.R. 1542, titled the Internet Freedom and Broadband Deployment Act of 2001, is sponsored by Rep. Billy Tauzin (R-LA) and Rep. John Dingell (D-MI), the Chairman and ranking Democrat on the House Commerce Committee.
The Judiciary Committee was only assigned to look into the antitrust aspect of the legislation. Even though the committee rejected the bill unanimously, the bill still goes to the House floor because the committee does not have full jurisdiction. Presently, the Justice Department can only make recommendations, not actual determinations.
Antitrust concerns had been raised in two areas.
First, for those of you that don't recall, the Tauzin-Dingell bill would add long-distance, high-speed data connections to the list of services regional Bell companies may offer without prior approval from the Federal Communications Commission. The bill would also free local Bell companies from the obligation to lease local lines to competing high-speed digital subscriber line (DSL) services.
Antitrust concerns had also been raised by a federal circuit court ruling in the case Goldwasser, et al. v. Ameritech Corporation in July of 2000 that said that with regard to the state Public Utility Commissions' (PUCs) oversight of the Regional Bell Operating Companies (RBOCs) "the record thus far is one of active use of these review procedures; there would be no basis at all to find that they are illusory." Since the state PUCs were doing such a good job, no federal intervention was necessary.
The House Judiciary Committee appeared to take antitrust concerns seriously. It voted to report unfavorably H.R. 1542, and added an amendment offered to H.R. 1542 by House Judiciary Committee Chairman F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr. (R-WI).
The sense in Sensenbrenner
The Sensenbrenner amendment tagged two things onto the original bill. First, it restored current law with respect to Bell entry into interLATA data except that the U.S. Department of Justice would become the decision-maker rather the FCC.
Second, the amendment reiterated that antitrust laws fully apply to matters involving the telecom industry, especially the RBOCs, countering the Goldwasser, et al. v. Ameritech Corporation ruling that said that the state PUCs were enough. Now, the DoJ will have a rule in RBOC regulation.
Rep. Sensenbrenner said "this legislation contains many other provisions in need of improvement that the referral did not allow us to address." Sensenbrenner contends that because of this, the Committee formed a strong bipartisan consensus against the Tauzin-Dingell bill, as evidenced by the legislation being voted down by voice vote.
Whatever the reason, a weakened H.R. 1542 is great news for Internet service providers and competitive local carriers. Whether it's the other flaws or Sensenbrenner's amendment, doesn't really matter. What does matter is that the bill is effectively dead in the water, or at least when it reaches the House Floor.
The Committee also considered alternative broadband legislation (H.R. 2120) sponsored by Reps. Chris Cannon (R-UT) and John Conyers (D-MI), which were defeated by a 19-15 vote. The Committee took no action on two related bills, H.R. 1697 and H.R. 1698
Frisby with glee
At least one CLEC lobbyist greeted the amendment with joy.
H. Russell Frisby, Jr., president of CompTel, said, "Today is also a great victory for the competitive industry. We set out with two simple goals, and we have achieved all of them. H.R. 1542 has been negatively referred and strong anti-trust enforcement has once again reclaimed its rightful place in telecommunications."
=========================================
"[H.R. 1542] will allow the monopoly Bells to crush their remaining CLEC opposition and extend their monopoly from end to end: from local service to long distance to fast Internet connections, or broadband."
— James K. Glassman, American Enterprise Institute
Testimony before House Judiciary Committee Hearing on HR 1542, June 5 |
