Rosenworcel defends FCC policy at budget hearing

WASHINGTON, July 9, 2024 – The House of Representatives held a Federal Communications Commission budget hearing Tuesday, with much of the discussion devoted to bipartisan policy disagreements.

The agency is asking Congress for $448 million, an increase of more than 14 percent over the fiscal year 2024 budget that Republican Commissioner Brendan Carr said he opposed it, calling the increase “contrary to agency precedent” in his opening statement.

The House of Representatives Appropriations Committee approved Budget $416 million For agencies, there was a slight increase of over 6 percent last month.

Carr joined Republican members of the Commerce Committee in sharply criticizing policies enacted by the agency’s 3-2 Democratic majority, including the restoration of net neutrality and new digital discrimination rules.

Net neutrality

On the Net Neutrality Front, FCC Chairwoman Jessica RosenworcelWhile reiterating its opposition to regulating broadband rates, it did not explicitly say whether a New York law mandating certain broadband rates for low-income households would be preempted by the agency’s Title II regulation.

“We do not have a petition before us, but in our order we stated that the state’s efforts to provide broadband internet access are not as such violate our rules,” she said. “We will review each individual case if a petition is brought before us, and none is before us at this time.”

The FCC’s net neutrality order overturned conflicting state broadband regulations, which, because the order departed from the Communications Act’s ability to regulate bandwidth, could spell trouble for New York law.

Actions to ensure affordability by setting price caps for low-income consumers generally enjoy Democratic support, and the commission expanded its order to say that “the mere existence of a State affordability program is not a rate regulation” and declined to address any specific State program.

As he has said before, Carr has called on the agency to repeal the law.

“The essence of New York law is naked rate regulation,” he said, “and we should come out and make it clear that we do not support rate regulation, and that provision of New York law is superseded by the agency’s Title II decision.”

Internet service providers sued to block the law, but judges ruled before issuing a Title II injunction that New York can regulate broadband prices as it sees fit.

Wi-Fi access points

Rosenworcel and Carr continued to argue over her proposal to expand the FCC’s E-Rate program to include Wi-Fi hotspots for off-campus use.

E-Rate, part of the agency’s Universal Service Fund, subsidizes Internet access for schools and libraries at a rate of $2.4 billion annually. Rosenworcel has released a proposal to expand the funding to include access points that could be loaned to students for home use.

“You probably remember from the pandemic kids and people sitting in parking lots and outside schools just trying to get online. This is an effort to stop that from happening,” Rosenworcel said. “We have the legal authority to do this. Every library in this country should have wireless access points for checking out.” She plans to vote on the issue at the July 18 FCC meeting.

Two committee Republicans and a GOP lawmaker opposed the plan, arguing that the Communications Act limits E-Rate to physical premises in schools and libraries. An FCC order adopted in October that extended E-Rate funding to Wi-Fi on school buses faced similar opposition and is pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

Carr called the hotspot proposal “illegal” and said the agency must “adhere to the statutory terms” of the E-Rate program.

Bulk settlement

Rosenworcel also defended her proposal to open a comment period on a ban on lump sum billing agreements between property owners and broadband providers, which has met some resistance since it was announced in March.

Such agreements typically involve landlords and providers negotiating terms to provide wholesale services to building tenants, who are then billed for their share of the costs. Rosenworcel said these agreements circumvent the agency’s ban on exclusive revenue-sharing agreements and lock tenants into contracts with certain ISPs when competitors are available. Providers argue that wholesale billing agreements allow them to provide services at lower prices than individual plans.

Representative. Gus BilirakisR-FL, told Rosenworcel he was concerned the move would drive up prices at nursing homes in his district

“We proposed legislation to ask those questions, recognizing that there are certain target groups, including people like the ones you described, who might like these services. But it’s been 14 years since we’ve looked at this issue, and 14 years is a long time in broadband,” she said in response. “We want everyone to benefit from competition, so I think opening this up to public comment is the right thing to do.”