'Net Neutrality Amendment' fails in U.S. House

Saturday, June 10, 2006 

On Thursday, Congress turned down the "Net Neutrality Amendment" to the Communications Opportunity, Promotion, and Enhancement Act (COPE Act) 269-152.

The COPE Act is designed to make it easier for telecommunications companies to offer cable TV service and strengthen competition. Proponents hope it would lower the price of high-speed Internet for consumer by enabling Internet service providers to bundle phone, data, video and mobile phone services. The act is the first major telecommunications bill to come before Congress in over a decade, and it passed by 321-101 vote on Thursday.

Portions of the "Net Neutrality" amendment to the COPE Act sought to assure that communication companies who provide Internet services treated all data delivery passing through their connections equally. It specified that each broadband provider has the duty "not to block, impair, degrade, discriminate against, or interfere with the ability of any person to use a broadband connection to access, use, send, receive, or offer lawful content, applications, or services over the Internet." The amendment's passage would have prevented AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and other broadband providers from charging content providers like Google, Yahoo, Amazon or eBay for priority access to their networks. Democrats were largely in favour of the legislation with 140 Ayes and 58 Noes, whereas only 11 Republicans voted for the measure, with 211 against.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi argued that "The imposition of additional fees for Internet content providers would unduly burden Web-based small businesses and start-ups," and that "They would also hamper communications by noncommercial users, those using religious speech, promoting civic involvement and exercising First Amendment freedoms."

The phone companies and their Congressional allies argued that the restrictions in the amendment would discourage investment in upgrading networks. Chief technology officer for BellSouth William L. Smith told the Washington Post that telephone companies should be able to charge companies for having their content load faster than that of competitors. "If I go to the airport, I can buy a coach standby ticket or a first-class ticket," Smith said. "In the shipping business, I can get two-day air or six-day ground."

The legislation has been subject to intense lobbying by telecommunication companies on one side, and content providers on the other. The bill is due to be discussed next in the Senate, where lobbying efforts from both sides are expected to intensify. The White House said that it supports the current bill.

Related News

• "US Congress drafting bill that may affect Internet freedoms" — Wikinews, April 23, 2006
• "FCC head Kevin Martin endorses telcos' tiered Internet plan" — Wikinews, March 25, 2006

Sister links

• Network Neutrality

Sources

• Mr. Markey, Mr. Boucher, Ms. Eshoo, and Mr. Inslee. AMENDMENTTOH.R. 5252 <broken link> [archived version] — markey.house.gov, June 6, 2006 (PDF)
• "FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 241" — Office of the Clerk, House of Representatives, June 8, 2006
• "FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 239" — Office of the Clerk, House of Representatives, June 8, 2006
• Rep. Barton. Communications Opportunity, Promotion, and Enhancement Act of 2006 <broken link> — The Library of Congress, May 17, 2006
• US Congress. "Communications Act of 1934, as Amended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996" — Federal Communications Commission, 1996
• Patti Waldmeir. "Telecoms groups rejoice as controls ruled out" — Financial Times, June 10 2006
• "Defeat for net neutrality backers" — BBC News, June 9, 2006
• Stephen Labaton. "House Backs Telecom Bill Favoring Phone Companies" — The New York Times, June 9, 2006
• Jonathan Krim. "Executive Wants to Charge for Web Speed" — Washington Post, December 1, 2005