House Hearing on Democrats' Net Neutrality Bill Criticized

Republicans and Democrats clashed Tuesday at a House Democrats hearing to restore Net neutrality protections of the Obama era.

The House Energy and Commerce Committee House sub-committee hearing examined the Save the Internet Act, which Democrats presented last week in the House and Senate.

The Republicans of the subcommittee strongly criticized the Democrats, who now control the House, for not having worked with them to introduce a bipartisan bill.

"It is time to adopt a bipartisan law that could become law," Greg Walden, a Republican from Oregon, said at the hearing. "Unfortunately, my friends on the other side have decided not to work with us."

Bob Latta, a Republican from Ohio and a prominent member of the committee, accused Democrats of retreating "to the most extreme position in this debate".

Meanwhile, Mike Doyle, a Democrat from Pennsylvania who heads the subcommittee, criticized the Republicans for introducing their own bills without warning or discussion with the Democrats.

"If the minority wants a bipartisan solution, I do not get any calls to discuss it," said Doyle. Instead, he said, "What I've had is three bills that were presented without our knowledge and a letter that we did not know who was coming."

Doyle said that he suggested a "better approach" to bipartisanship and that his door was always open to his colleagues if someone wanted to "venture into it".

Political fracture

The Democrats' bill would essentially reinstate a set of rules adopted by a democrat-led FCC in 2015 that banned broadband companies from blocking, slowing, or charging additional fees for priority access to websites and services. . The rules were repealed in 2017 after the Republicans took control of the White House and the FCC.

The hearing was the first of this Congress to consider legislation on the issue, although it was the second hearing on the neutrality of the Internet. Following a hearing in February, Republicans presented three of their own bills, which Democrats criticized for failing to give the FCC sufficient power to control high-profile corporations. debit.

Difficult exchanges and criticism among legislators point to the deep political divide on the issue of Internet neutrality. The FCC decision of the Obama era to reclassify broadband networks to subject them to the same stringent regulations that govern telephone networks is at the heart of the debate. Proponents say that reclassification was necessary to give the rules an underlying legal basis.

The stricter definition provoked a brutal reaction on the part of the Republicans, who described the move as clumsy and brutal.

The bill the Democrats tabled last week reiterates this classification, which gives the FCC the power to control non-compliant broadband providers. But the bill also removes old and obsolete provisions of the classification, which do not concern broadband.

At the hearing, Doyle argued that this was a "step forward for our colleagues and the [broadband] industry."

"We are trying to work in a new way to introduce a bill that recognizes some of the concerns of minorities," he said.

Republicans like Latta and Cathy McMorris-Rodgers of Washington, who introduced his own bill based on a bill passed by his state's legislature last year, said the Democrats' bill was aimed more at to "score political points" that instead of proposing a solution to protect network neutrality. She also said that the "partisan approach" of Democrats would "not pass the Senate".

Robert McDowell, a Republican who previously served on the FCC and testified before the committee, agrees with McMorris-Rodger.

"I think you can find bipartisan support [on net neutrality] and get 60 votes in the Senate, "he said. But I do not think it's the bill to do it. "

Democrats will go from the front

At the end of the hearing, Doyle stated that the bill would continue the work of the committee in the House.

House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California and Chuck Schumer of New York, who heads Democrats in the Senate, said last week during the presentation of the bill that they were convinced that it would be passed by both the House and the Senate.

"Last spring, our colleagues in the US Senate had the choice to take a stand for the average citizen rather than for big special interests, but also to protect consumers and entrepreneurs," said Schumer during the presentation. law Project. Three Republicans in the Senate voted in the name of special interests. The Senate was passed, but unfortunately, a Republican House of Representatives put it aside. We now have a Democratic House and Republicans have a second chance to right the Trump administration burden. "

But the legislation is far from being a slam dunk, even among members of their own party. In addition to Republicans, many Democrats in the House last year did not support the efforts to reinstate the 2015 rules. It is also possible that the three Republicans who supported the law on the review of the US Congress in the Senate do not undertake to support this operation.