Majority Statement

• Ted Stevens

  Senator
  Read statement

  Majority Statement

  Ted Stevens

   

  MAY 25, 2006

  Thank you, Ranking Member Inouye and Senator McCain, for convening these hearings on telecommunications law reform and facilitating such a robust debate on what ails the internet.

  I have expressed before my concern over this net neutrality debate and its place in the broader consideration of telecommunications law reform.  And I think it is important at this juncture for all of us to stop and reconsider our primary objectives in taking up telecom reform legislation.

  In prioritizing the issues, I begin with the proposition that while there are many items included in the telecom reform bill there is one recurring theme that is present throughout – to enact legislation that will promote the expeditious deployment of affordable broadband services to all Americans. 

  Whether we are talking about updating our Universal Service rules to encourage deployment of these services to rural communities, allowing for the deployment of unlicensed broadband devices in spectrum not being used by television broadcasters, or updating our video franchising laws to accommodate the speedy entry of broadband based video services to the marketplace – this legislation is purposefully and rightfully directed towards opening new markets for broadband services and encouraging competition in the marketplace to ensure that consumers pay a reasonable price for access to these new services. 

  Modernizing our telecom laws in ways that encourage the deployment of new telecommunications services to the marketplace also strengthens the long-term competitiveness and economic well-being of the United States. 

  We must therefore measure every proposed provision in telecom reform legislation against this backdrop and in so doing ask ourselves two questions.  First, does the proposal at issue encourage or impede the deployment of broadband service.  Second, how will the proposal at issue affect the cost of consumer broadband access.

  I have heard again and again that any legislation that regulates the internet at this point risks slowing broadband deployment and increasing the cost of consumer broadband access.  I find it telling that I have not come across one salient argument that rebuts these suppositions. 

  The fact that we are spending what precious little time we have left this session discussing possible legislation that may in fact operate to frustrate the underlying objectives of telecom reform alarms me. 

  I urge my colleagues to think about what we are trying to accomplish with our telecom reform legislation, measure each proposal against this backdrop, and to keep their eyes on the ball when considering these important issues.
  

• John McCain

  Senator
  Read statement

  Majority Statement

  John McCain

  Today’s hearing focuses mainly on net neutrality, a term that was rarely used by average Americans just months ago. In fact, before this year, fewer than 300 newspaper articles were written about net neutrality. By contrast, just in the last month, almost 500 articles have been written on net neutrality – along with about 1,800 blog entries.

  The growing attention paid to net neutrality befits the seriousness and the difficulty of the matter before us. The Internet has traditionally been a neutral network of pipes that distributes packets of data in generally the same way regardless of whether it’s email, voice communications, video transmissions, or web site content. Some refer to this model as the “dumb pipe,” because it doesn’t choose what it carries. But this so-called “dumb pipe” has resulted in an abundance of innovation. Everything from search engines to email to instant messaging has resulted largely from this network architecture. Current proposals to change how the Internet works may impact deeply how we use this essential medium of communication and commerce.

  Over time, we have understood that network operators do need to prioritize certain data that flows through their networks. For example, the failure of a 911 emergency call through a VoIP application could result in great injury or death. We know that networks must be able to ensure such critical communications, as well as protect against threats such as spam and spyware. Practical need and technological advances have thus led to innovations inside the network, which many believe are just as important as the advances in services and devices connected to the Internet on the edges.

  I strongly support innovation, and I believe that the network operators should get a return on their infrastructure investments, which will encourage more development of broadband capacity in the U.S. I also firmly believe that network operators should not stifle the free flow of information that has been the essential component of the Internet – now such a fixture and core component of our social, economic, and political lives. Prohibiting consumers – or significantly limiting them – from legitimate use of the Internet is anathema to the principles of democracy and it goes contrary to our free market economy. It may also jeopardize the tremendous innovation that has been such a key part of the Internet’s growth and development.

  I also strongly support robust competition. Unfortunately, today the broadband market is one where too many consumers have only two, sometimes one, and even no broadband service options. According to the Federal Communications Commission, a quarter of all zip codes have two or fewer broadband service providers – and many observers believe that there is much less competition than the FCC’s figures suggest. Without significant competition in the broadband market, network operators may be tempted to exercise market control that hurts consumers. I hope that my colleagues will join me in promoting greater competition by encouraging municipal broadband initiatives and the emergence of new technologies such as broadband over power lines and wireless services.

  Lastly, on a separate note, I understand that this morning Treasury Secretary John Snow announced that the Internal Revenue Service will no collect the federal excise tax on long-distance telephone services. This antiquated “luxury” tax was enacted in 1898 to fund the Spanish American war and has far outlived its purpose. I introduced bills in the 106th and 107th Congresses to repeal this tax and look forward to consumers seeing immediate savings on their long distance phone bill.

   

Minority Statement

• Daniel K. Inouye

  Senator
  Read statement

  Minority Statement

  Daniel K. Inouye

  Today, the Committee examines topics that are of critical importance to the future of competition in communications markets and to the preservation of an open and free Internet.
  

  While the term “network neutrality” may be new to some, the principle of nondiscrimination that it represents has stood as one of the founding tenets of communications law for some time.
  

  It has been central to the development of the Internet and has fueled the explosive growth in the applications and services enjoyed today by millions of Americans.  If we are to continue to promote further innovation, we must ensure that this very old principle remains a central part of communications law in the new information age.
  

  Towards that end, I recently cosponsored legislation introduced by my colleagues Senators Snowe and Dorgan, to reaffirm our commitment to innovation and openness by establishing enforceable rules that will prevent unfair discrimination by network operators.
  

  In addition to our concerns about fair competition on the Internet, we must not lose sight of other competitive issues such as the need to preserve essential rights of interconnection for competitive communications providers and to restrain market power in special access markets, where consolidation among the Bell companies is only making a bad problem worse.
  

  To assist us in our review of these issues, I am sharing a discussion draft today with Chairman Stevens, my colleagues, and other interested parties.  The draft includes reforms that will promote competition in all markets and will preserve ’s ability to compete in a global information economy.   I look forward to working with my colleagues on these issues in the days ahead.
  

  ###
  

Testimony

• Mr. Paul Misener

  Vice President, Global Public policy

  Amazon.com
  Download Testimony (3.61 MB)

• Mr. Tom Tauke

  Executive Vice President

  Verizon
  Download Testimony (25.35 KB)

• Mr. Timothy Regan

  Senior Vice President

  Corning Incorporated
  Download Testimony (98.36 KB)

• Mr. Roger Cochetti

  Group Director, U.S. Public Policy

  CompTIA
  Download Testimony (38.64 KB)

• Mr. Earl Comstock

  President and Chief Executive Officer

  CompTel
  Download Testimony (39.21 KB)