49–008 

109TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 109–491 

PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 5252, COMMUNICATIONS OPPORTUNITY, PROMOTION, AND ENHANCEMENT ACT OF 2006 

JUNE 7, 2006.—Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida, from the Committee on 

Rules, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H. Res. 850] 

The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration House 

Resolution 850, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to the House 

with the recommendation that the resolution be adopted. 

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 5252, the Communications Opportunity, Promotion, and Enhancement Act of 

2006, under a structured rule. The rule provides one hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and 

ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. The rule waives all points of order against consideration of 

the bill. The rule provides that the bill shall be considered as read. 

The rule makes in order only those amendments printed in this 

report, and provides that those amendments may be offered only in 

the order printed in this report, may be offered only by a Member 

designated in this report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in this report equally divided and 

controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject 

to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for a division 

of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. The 

rule waives all points of order against the amendments printed in 

this report. Finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit with 

or without instructions. 

EXPLANATION OF WAIVERS

The waiver of all points of order against consideration of the bill 

includes a waiver of clause 2(h) of rule XI (requiring that a quorum 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
2 

is actually present when a measure is reported by a committee), because the Committee on Energy and Commerce ordered reported a 

‘‘committee print’’ rather than a bill properly introduced and referred to the committee. 

COMMITTEE VOTES

Pursuant to clause 3(b) of House rule XIII the results of each 

record vote on an amendment or motion to report, together with 

the names of those voting for and against, are printed below: 

Rules Committee Record Vote No. 214 

Date: June 7, 2006. 

Measure: H.R. 5252, Communications Opportunity, Promotion, 

and Enhancement Act of 2006. 

Motion by: Mr. McGovern. 

Summary of Motion: To report an open rule. 

Results: Defeated 3 to 7. 

Vote by Members: Diaz-Balart—Nay; Hastings (WA)—Nay; Sessions—Nay; Capito—Nay; Cole—Nay; Bishop—Nay; McGovern— 

Yea; Hastings (FL)—Yea; Matsui—Yea; Dreier—Nay. 

Rules Committee Record Vote No. 215 

Date: June 7, 2006. 

Measure: H.R. 5252, Communications Opportunity, Promotion, 

and Enhancement Act of 2006. 

Motion by: Mr. McGovern. 

Summary of Motion: To make in order and provide the appropriate waivers for the amendment offered by Representative Doyle, 

which requires a national franchisee to certify compliance with municipal rights-of-way requirements. Clarifies that the FCC will not 

resolve rights-of-way disputes. Provides for local enforcement, with 

an appeal to the FCC, of the requirements on national franchisees. 

Clarifies the gross revenues definition. Establishes fee dispute resolution procedures to encourage parties to settle their differences. 

Requires the FCC to consult with franchising authorities in establishing rules to implement the Act. 

Results: Defeated 3 to 8. 

Vote by Members: Diaz-Balart—Nay; Hastings (WA)—Nay; Sessions—Nay; Capito—Nay; Cole—Nay; Bishop—Nay; Gingrey—Nay; 

McGovern—Yea; Hastings (FL)—Yea; Matsui—Yea; Dreier—Nay. 

Rules Committee Record Vote No. 216 

Date: June 7, 2006. 

Measure: H.R. 5252, Communications Opportunity, Promotion, 

and Enhancement Act of 2006. 

Motion by: Mr. McGovern. 

Summary of Motion: To make in order and provide the appropriate waivers for the amendment offered by Representative Solis, 

which establishes market-based incremental service requirements 

for a national franchisee’s access and use of the public rights-ofway within a franchise area so that the operator must eventually 

be capable of providing cable service to all households in the franchise area, as is required of cable operators under existing law. 

Results: Defeated 3 to 8. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
3 

Vote by Members: Diaz-Balart—Nay; Hastings (WA)—Nay; Sessions—Nay; Capito—Nay; Cole—Nay; Bishop—Nay; Gingrey—Nay; 

McGovern—Yea; Hastings (FL)—Yea; Matsui—Yea; Dreier—Nay. 

Rules Committee Record Vote No. 217 

Date: June 7, 2006. 

Measure: H.R. 5252, Communications Opportunity, Promotion, 

and Enhancement Act of 2006. 

Motion by: Mr. Hastings of Florida. 

Summary of Motion: To make in order and provide the appropriate waivers for the amendment offered by Representative Sensenbrenner, which establishes an antitrust remedy under the Clayton Act for anticompetitive and discriminatory practices by 

broadband service providers. Expressly permits a broadband network provider to take steps to manage the functioning and security 

of its network, to give priority to emergency communications, and 

to take steps to prevent violations of Federal and State law, or to 

comply with a court order. Also allows for an expedited administrative process to resolve complaints alleging violations of new Section 

28 of the Clayton Act. Also clarifies that both the FCC and FTC 

have authority to enforce Section 28 via administrative proceedings 

and specify which agency has lead jurisdiction over various types 

of complaints. 

Results: Defeated 3 to 8. 

Vote by Members: Diaz-Balart—Nay; Hastings (WA)—Nay; Sessions—Nay; Capito—Nay; Cole—Nay; Bishop—Nay; Gingrey—Nay; 

McGovern—Yea; Hastings (FL)—Yea; Matsui—Yea; Dreier—Nay. 

Rules Committee Record Vote No. 218 

Date: June 7, 2006. 

Measure: H.R. 5252, Communications Opportunity, Promotion, 

and Enhancement Act of 2006. 

Motion by: Mr. Hastings of Florida. 

Summary of Motion: To make in order and provide the appropriate waivers for the amendment offered by Representative Hinchey, which allows national franchise providers the option of not 

carrying local channels that fail to conform with the fairness doctrine. This doctrine, which was in effect at the FCC from 1949 to 

1987, requires broadcast channels to provide balanced coverage of 

controversial or political topics. 

Results: Defeated 3 to 8. 

Vote by Members: Diaz-Balart—Nay; Hastings (WA)—Nay; Sessions—Nay; Capito—Nay; Cole—Nay; Bishop—Nay; Gingrey—Nay; 

McGovern—Yea; Hastings (FL)—Yea; Matsui—Yea; Dreier—Nay. 

Rules Committee Record Vote No. 219 

Date: June 7, 2006. 

Measure: H.R. 5252, Communications Opportunity, Promotion, 

and Enhancement Act of 2006. 

Motion by: Mrs. Matsui. 

Summary of Motion: To make in order and provide the appropriate waivers for the amendment offered by Representative Solis, 

which strengthens the anti-discrimination provision by: (1) prohibiting discrimination not just on the basis of income but also on the 

basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex; (2) forbidding 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
4 

not just the denial of service but also the offering of inferior access 

to such service in a manner that has the purpose or effect of discriminating; and (3) allowing local enforcement of the provisions 

with an appeal to the FCC. 

Results: Defeated 3 to 8. 

Vote by Members: Diaz-Balart—Nay; Hastings (WA)—Nay; Sessions—Nay; Capito—Nay; Cole—Nay; Bishop—Nay; Gingrey—Nay; 

McGovern—Yea; Hastings (FL)—Yea; Matsui—Yea; Dreier—Nay. 

Rules Committee Record Vote No. 220 

Date: June 7, 2006. 

Measure: H.R. 5252, Communications Opportunity, Promotion, 

and Enhancement Act of 2006. 

Motion by: Mrs. Matsui. 

Summary of Motion: To make in order and provide the appropriate waivers for the amendment offered by Representative Bean, 

which creates a new Office of Internet Safety and Public Awareness within the FTC to coordinate national strategy with existing 

Internet safety initiatives. Also authorizes grants to qualifying entities to promote Internet safety and launches a national public 

awareness campaign. 

Results: Defeated 3 to 8. 

Vote by Members: Diaz-Balart—Nay; Hastings (WA)—Nay; Sessions—Nay; Capito—Nay; Cole—Nay; Bishop—Nay; Gingrey—Nay; 

McGovern—Yea; Hastings (FL)—Yea; Matsui—Yea; Dreier—Nay. 

Rules Committee Record Vote No. 221 

Date: June 7, 2006. 

Measure: H.R. 5252, Communications Opportunity, Promotion, 

and Enhancement Act of 2006. 

Motion by: Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart. 

Summary of Motion: To report the rule. 

Results: Agreed to 8 to 3. 

Vote by Members: Diaz-Balart—Yea; Hastings (WA)—Yea; Sessions—Yea; Capito—Yea; Cole—Yea; Bishop—Yea; Gingrey—Yea; 

McGovern—Nay; Hastings (FL)—Nay; Matsui—Nay; Dreier—Yea. 

SUMMARY OF AMENDMENTS MADE IN ORDER

1. Barton (TX): Manager’s Amendment. Clarifies the following: 

(1) what constitutes a franchise area; (2) that a person or group 

seeking authority to provide service under a national franchise 

must agree to comply with all requirements the FCC promulgates 

pursuant to the consumer protection and customer service provisions in the bill; (3) that anyone with a national franchise shall be 

subject to all the cable operator provisions of Title VI of the Communications Act except for the ones specifically excepted in the bill; 

and (4) that nothing in the legislation affects existing pole attachment law. (10 minutes) 

2. Jackson-Lee (TX): Reduces the fee paid to local franchise authorities for PEG/iNet support by women-owned, small businesses, 

and socially and economically disadvantaged firms from 1% to 

0.5%. (10 minutes) 

3. Wynn (MD): Allows a franchising authority to issue an order 

requiring compliance with FCC revised consumer protection rules. 

(10 minutes) 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
5 

4. Johnson, Eddie Bernice (TX): Increases discrimination penalty from $500,000 to $750,000 for a cable operator that denies access 

to cable service to residents because of the income of that group. 

(10 minutes) 

5. Rush (IL): Sets forth a complaint process to resolve fee disputes between a local franchise authority and a cable operator. A 

franchise authority or a cable operator must provide written notice 

to each other if there is a dispute regarding franchise fees or PEG/ 

iNet support. Both parties must meet within 30 days of notification. If the local franchise authority and the cable operator have 

not resolved the dispute within 90 days then both parties can petition the FCC to resolve the complaint. The FCC has 90 days to resolve any fee disputes. Provides a 3-year limitation in bringing a 

complaint to the FCC regarding fee disputes. (10 minutes) 

6. Smith, Lamar (TX): Clarifies that the language in section 201 

(i.e. the new section 7l5(b)(3) of the Communications Act) that 

gives exclusive authority to the FCC to adjudicate complaints concerning network neutrality does not affect the applicability of the 

antitrust laws to cases involving network neutrality or the jurisdiction of the courts to hear such cases. (10 minutes) 

7. Markey (MA)/Eshoo (CA)/Boucher (VA)/Inslee (WA): Seeks to 

restore important non-discrimination requirements enforced by the 

Federal Communications Commission that from the inception of 

the Internet until August of 2005 were binding on telecommunications carriers. This amendment essentially has 3 parts: provides 

a policy statement in addition to the general duties of broadband 

network providers; provides for preserved rights and exceptions to 

the general statutory duties in the first part; and provides an expedited complaint process and an antitrust savings clause. (20 minutes) 

8. Gutknecht (MN)/Boyd (FL)/Skelton (MO)/Herseth (SD)/Stupak 

(MI)/Peterson, John (PA): Preserves FCC authority to require VOIP 

providers to: (1) Contribute to the Federal universal service fund 

when they interconnect, either directly or indirectly, with incumbent local exchange carrier networks; and (2) Properly compensate 

network owners for the use of their network just as incumbent and 

competitive carriers do today. (10 minutes) 

TEXT OF AMENDMENTS MADE IN ORDER

1. AN AMENDMENT TO BE OFFERED BY REPRESENTATIVE BARTON OF

TEXAS, OR HIS DESIGNEE, DEBATABLE FOR 10 MINUTES

Page 5, line 4, strike ‘‘intends’’ and insert ‘‘seeks authority’’. 

Page 5, lines 13 and 23, and page 6, line 4, strike ‘‘contiguous’’. 

Page 5, beginning on line 17, strike ‘‘within the jurisdiction of 

such unit of general local government contains’’ and insert ‘‘overlaps with’’. 

Page 6, lines 1 and 2, strike ‘‘area contained in the franchise 

area of such cable operator’’ and insert ‘‘overlapping area’’. 

Page 6, line 15, after ‘‘certification’’ insert ‘‘for authority’’. 

Page 6, line 20, strike ‘‘under’’ and insert ‘‘in accordance with’’. 

Page 7, line 1, strike ‘‘and subsection (g) of this section’’ and insert ‘‘(including the rules adopted under section 632(b) pursuant to 

subsection (g) of this section)’’. 

Page 8, line 4, strike ‘‘that files’’ and insert ‘‘with’’. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
6 

Page 9, line 19, after the period insert the following: ‘‘The Commission shall by rule specify the methods by which a franchising 

authority shall notify a cable operator of the hearing for which its 

participation is required under this subparagraph.’’. 

Page 12, line 24, strike ‘‘definition of gross revenues’’ and insert 

‘‘definitions of gross revenues and franchise fee’’. 

Page 15, line 25, after ‘‘to provide’’ insert ‘‘on the day before its 

national franchise became effective’’. 

Page 16, beginning on line 20, strike subparagraph (A) and insert the following: 

‘‘(A) A cable operator franchised under this section shall 

ensure that any public, educational, or governmental programming carried by the cable operator under this section 

within a franchise area is available to all of its subscribers 

in such franchise area. 

Page 17, line 16, after ‘‘cable operators shall’’ insert ‘‘, if at least 

one of the operators is providing cable service in the franchise area 

pursuant to a franchise under this section,’’. 

Page 19, line 16, strike ‘‘Act’’ and insert ‘‘section’’. 

Page 22, line 7, strike ‘‘Congress’’ and insert ‘‘Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate’’. 

Page 27, beginning on line 24, strike ‘‘The following sections’’ and 

insert ‘‘The provisions of this title that apply to a cable operator 

shall apply in a franchise area to a person or group with a national 

franchise under this section to provide cable service in such franchise area, except that the following sections’’. 

Page 28, line 3, before the colon insert ‘‘in such franchise area’’. 

Page 28, line 7, strike ‘‘Act’’ and insert ‘‘section’’. 

Page 29, line 22, strike ‘‘subsections (c)(1) and (e)(2)’’ and insert 

‘‘subsection (c)(1) or (e)(2)’’. 

Page 30, line 22, after ‘‘cable operator’’ insert ‘‘with a national 

franchise’’. 

Page 38, line 5, strike ‘‘and’’; on page 39, line 2, strike the period 

at the end of the line and insert a semicolon; and after such line 

insert the following: 

(4) in paragraph (7)(D), by inserting after ‘‘section 653 of this 

title’’ the following; ‘‘except in a franchise area in which such 

system is used to provide cable service under a national franchise pursuant to section 630’’; 

(5) in paragraph (9)— 

(A) by inserting ‘‘(A)’’ after ‘‘means’’; and 

(B) by inserting before the semicolon at the end the following: ‘‘; and (B) a national franchise that is effective 

under section 630 on the basis of a certification with the 

Commission’’; and 

(6) in paragraph (10), by inserting before the semicolon at 

the end the following: ‘‘, but does not include the Commission 

with respect to a national franchise under section 630’’. 

Page 39, line 8, before the period insert the following: ‘‘pursuant 

to the amendments made by this title’’. 

Page 41, after line 20, insert the following new section: 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
7 

SEC. 104. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION. 

Nothing in this Act or the amendments made by this Act shall 

affect the application or interpretation of section 224 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 224). 

Page 53, line 24, after ‘‘for a fee’’ insert ‘‘or without a fee’’. 

Page 54, beginning on line 11, strike paragraph (3) and insert 

the following: 

‘‘(3) NECESSARY E–911 INFRASTRUCTURE.—The term ‘necessary E–911 infrastructure’ means the originating trucks to 

the selective routers, selective routers, databases (including 

automatic location information databases and master street address guides), trunks, or other related facilities necessary for 

the delivery and completion of 911 and E–911 calls, or other 

911 and E–911 equipment, facilities, databases, interfaces, and 

related capabilities specified by the Commission. 

Page 57, line 18, and page 60, line 13, strike ‘‘716(j)’’ and insert 

‘‘716(l)’’. 

2. AN AMENDMENT TO BE OFFERED BY REPRESENTATIVE JACKSONLEE OF TEXAS, OR HER DESIGNEE, DEBATABLE FOR 10 MINUTES

Page 15, line 16, before the period insert ‘‘, except that such 

amount shall be equal to 0.5 percent of such revenues in the case 

of a cable operator that is a small business concern owned and controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals or a 

small business concern owned and controlled by women (as such 

terms are defined in section 8(d)(3) of the Small Business Act)’’. 

3. AN AMENDMENT TO BE OFFERED BY REPRESENTATIVE WYNN OF

MARYLAND, OR HIS DESIGNEE, DEBATABLE FOR 10 MINUTES

Page 21, strike line 17 and all that follows through page 23, line 

22, and insert the following: 

‘‘(B) The Commission’s revised consumer protection rules 

shall provide for forfeiture penalties, or customer rebates, 

refunds or credits, or both, and shall establish forfeiture, 

rebate, refund, and credit guidelines with respect to violations of such rules. Such guidelines shall— 

‘‘(i) provide for increased forfeiture penalties for repeated violations of the standards in such rules; and 

‘‘(ii) establish procedures by which any forfeiture 

penalty assessed by the Commission under this subsection shall be paid by the cable operator directly to 

the franchising authority affected by the violation. 

‘‘(4) COMPLAINTS.— 

‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Any person may file a complaint with 

respect to an alleged violation of the Commission’s revised 

consumer protection rules in a franchise area by a cable 

operator franchised under this section— 

‘‘(i) with the franchising authority in such area; or 

‘‘(ii) with the Commission. 

‘‘(B) LOCAL FRANCHISING AUTHORITY PROCEDURE.—On its 

own motion or at the request of any person, a franchising 

authority for a franchise area may— 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
8 

‘‘(i) initiate its own complaint proceeding with respect to such an alleged violation; or 

‘‘(ii) file a complaint with the Commission regarding 

such an alleged violation. 

‘‘(C) TIMING.—The Commission or the franchising authority conducting a proceeding under this paragraph shall 

render a decision on any complaint filed under this paragraph within 90 days of its filing. 

‘‘(5) LOCAL FRANCHISING ORDERS.— 

‘‘(A) REQUIRING COMPLIANCE.—In a proceeding commenced by a franchising authority, a franchising authority 

may issue an order requiring compliance with the Commission’s revised consumer protection rules, but a franchising 

authority may not create any new standard or regulation, 

or expand upon or modify the Commission’s revised consumer protection rules. 

‘‘(B) ACCESS TO RECORDS.—In such a proceeding, the 

franchising authority may issue an order requiring the filing of any data, documents, or records (including any contract, agreement, or arrangement between the subscriber 

and the cable operator) that are directly related to the alleged violation. 

‘‘(C) COST OF FRANCHISING AUTHORITY ORDERS.—A franchising authority may charge a cable operator franchised 

under this section a nominal fee to cover the costs of 

issuing orders under this paragraph. 

‘‘(6) COMMISSION REMEDIES; APPEALS.— 

‘‘(A) REMEDIES.—An order of a franchising authority 

under this subsection shall be enforced by the Commission 

under this Act if— 

‘‘(i) the order is not appealed to the Commission; 

‘‘(ii) the Commission does not agree to grant review 

during the 30-day period described in subparagraph 

(B); or 

‘‘(iii) the order is sustained on appeal by the Commission. 

‘‘(B) APPEALS.—Any party may file a notice of appeal of 

an order of a franchising authority under this subsection 

with the Commission, and shall transmit a copy of such 

notice to the other parties to the franchising authority proceeding. Such appeal shall be deemed denied at the end of 

the 30-day period beginning on the date of the filing unless 

the Commission agrees within such period to grant review 

of the appeal. 

‘‘(C) TIMING.—After the filing of a notice of appeal under 

subparagraph (B), if such notice is not denied by operation 

of such subparagraph, the Commission shall render a decision within 90 days of such filing. 

‘‘(7) ANNUAL REPORT.— 

‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after the date 

of enactment of this section, and annually thereafter, the 

Commission shall submit a report to the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and 

the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
9 

of the Senate on the implementation of this subsection, including the following: 

‘‘(i) The number of complaints filed with franchising 

authorities under clause (4)(A)(i). 

‘‘(ii) Any trends concerning complaints, such as increases in the number of particular types of complaints or in new types of complaints. 

‘‘(iii) The timeliness of the response of such franchising authorities and the results of the complaints 

filed with such franchising authorities, if not appealed 

to the Commission. 

‘‘(iv) The number of complaints filed with the Commission under clause (4)(A)(ii). 

‘‘(v) The number of appeals filed with the Commission under paragraph (6)(B) and the number of such 

appeals which the Commission agreed to hear. 

‘‘(vi) The timeliness of the Commission’s responses 

to such complaints and appeals. 

‘‘(vii) The results of such complaints and appeals 

filed with the Commission. 

‘‘(B) SUBMISSION OF INFORMATION BY FRANCHISING AU- THORITIES.—The Commission may request franchising authorities to submit information about the complaints filed 

with the franchising authorities under subparagraph 

(4)(A)(i), including the number of such complaints and the 

timeliness of the response and the results of such complaints. 

‘‘(8) DEFINITION.—For purposes of this subsection, the term 

‘Commission’s revised consumer protection rules’ means the 

national consumer protection and customer service rules under 

section 632(b) as revised by the Commission pursuant to paragraph (2) of this subsection. 

4. AN AMENDMENT TO BE OFFERED BY REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE

BERNICE JOHNSON OF TEXAS, OR HER DESIGNEE, DEBATABLE FOR

10 MINUTES

Page 27, line 5, strike ‘‘$500,000’’ and insert ‘‘$750,000’’. 

5. AN AMENDMENT TO BE OFFERED BY REPRESENTATIVE RUSH OF

ILLINOIS, OR HIS DESIGNEE, DEBATABLE FOR 10 MINUTES

Page 30, after line 15, insert the following new paragraph: 

‘‘(6) FEE DISPUTE RESOLUTION.— 

‘‘(A) COMPLAINT.—A franchising authority or a cable operator may file a complaint at the Commission to resolve 

a dispute between such authority and operator with respect to the amount of any fee required under subsection 

(c)(1) or (e)(2) if— 

‘‘(i) the franchising authority or the cable operator 

provides the other entity written notice of such dispute; and 

‘‘(ii) the franchising authority and the cable operator 

have not resolved the dispute within 90 calendar days 

after receipt of such notice. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
10 

‘‘(B) MEETINGS.—Within 30 calendar days after receipt 

of notice of a dispute provided pursuant to subparagraph 

(A)(i), representatives of the franchising authority and the 

cable operator, with authority to resolve the dispute, shall 

meet to attempt to resolve the dispute. 

‘‘(C) LIMITATION.—A complaint under subparagraph (A) 

shall be filed not later than 3 years after the end of the 

period to which the disputed amount relates, unless such 

time is extended by written agreement between the franchising authority and cable operator. 

‘‘(D) RESOLUTION.—The Commission shall issue an order 

resolving any complaint filed under subparagraph (A) 

within 90 days of filing. 

6. AN AMENDMENT TO BE OFFERED BY REPRESENTATIVE LAMAR

SMITH OF TEXAS, OR HIS DESIGNEE, DEBATABLE FOR 10 MINUTES

Page 44, after line 12, insert the following (and make such technical and conforming changes as may be appropriate): 

‘‘(d)(1) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section shall be 

construed to modify, impair, or supersede the applicability of the 

antitrust laws or the jurisdiction of the district courts of the United 

States to hear claims arising under the antitrust laws. 

‘‘(2) DEFINITION OF ANTITRUST LAWS.—The term ‘antitrust laws’ 

has the meaning given it in subsection (a) of the first section of the 

Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 12(a)), except that such term includes section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 45) to the 

extent that such section 5 applies to unfair methods of competition.’’ 

7. AN AMENDMENT TO BE OFFERED BY REPRESENTATIVE MARKEY

OF MASSACHUSETTS, OR HIS DESIGNEE, DEBATABLE FOR 20 MINUTES

Strike section 201 of the bill and insert the following: 

SECTION 201. NETWORK NEUTRALITY. 

(a) AMENDMENT.—Title VII of the Communications Act of 1934 

(47 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following new section: 

‘‘SEC. 715. NETWORK NEUTRALITY. 

‘‘(a) POLICY.—It is the policy of the United States— 

‘‘(1) to maintain and enhance the vibrant and competitive 

free market that presently exists for the Internet and Internet 

services, upon which Internet commerce relies; 

‘‘(2) to preserve and promote the open and interconnected nature of the Internet and consumer empowerment and choice; 

‘‘(3) to foster innovation, investment, and competition among 

network providers, as well as application, content, and service 

providers; 

‘‘(4) to ensure vigorous and prompt enforcement of this section’s requirements to safeguard innovation, consumer protection, and marketplace certainty; and 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
11 

‘‘(5) to preserve the security and reliability of the Internet 

and the services that enable consumers to access content, applications, and services over the Internet. 

‘‘(b) IN GENERAL.—Each broadband network provider has the 

duty— 

‘‘(1) 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; 

‘‘(2) to operate its broadband network in a nondiscriminatory 

manner so that any person can offer or provide content, applications, and services through, or over, such broadband network 

with equivalent or better capability than the provider extends 

to itself or affiliated parties, and without the imposition of a 

charge for such nondiscriminatory network operation; 

‘‘(3) if the provider prioritizes or offers enhanced quality of 

service to data of a particular type, to prioritize or offer enhanced quality of service to all data of that type (regardless of 

the origin of such data) without imposing a surcharge or other 

consideration for such prioritization or enhanced quality of 

service; 

‘‘(4) to enable a user to attach and use any device to the operator’s network that does not physically damage, make unauthorized use of, or materially degrade other users’ utilization 

of, the network; and 

‘‘(5) to clearly and conspicuously disclose to users, in plain 

language, accurate information about the speed, nature, and 

limitations of their broadband connection. 

‘‘(c) PRESERVED RIGHTS AND EXCEPTIONS.—Nothing in this section shall prevent a broadband network provider from taking reasonable and nondiscriminatory measures to— 

‘‘(1) manage the functioning of its network to protect the security of such network and broadband network services, provided that such management does not depend upon the affiliation with the broadband network provider of the content, applications, or services on the network; 

‘‘(2) offer varied service plans to users at defined levels of 

bandwidth and different prices; 

‘‘(3) offer consumer protection services (including services for 

the prevention of unsolicited commercial electronic messages, 

parental controls, or other similar capabilities), or offer cable 

service, so long as a user may refuse or disable such services; 

‘‘(4) give priority to emergency communications and telemedicine services; or 

‘‘(5) prevent any violation of Federal or State law, or comply 

with any court-ordered law enforcement directive. 

‘‘(d) EXPEDITED COMPLAINT PROCESS.—Within 180 days after the 

date of enactment of this section, the Commission shall prescribe 

regulations providing for the expedited review of any complaints alleging a violation of this section. Such regulations shall include a 

requirement that the Commission issue a final order regarding any 

request for a ruling contained in a complaint not later than 30 days 

after the date of submission of such complaint. 

‘‘(e) DEFINITIONS.—As used in this section: 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
12 

‘‘(1) BROADBAND NETWORK PROVIDER.—The term ‘broadband 

network provider’ means a person or entity that owns, controls, 

operates, or resells and controls any facility used to provide 

broadband network service to the public, by whatever technology and whether provided for a fee, in exchange for an explicit benefit, or for free. 

‘‘(2) BROADBAND NETWORK SERVICE.—The term ‘broadband 

network service’ means a two-way transmission service that 

connects to the Internet and transmits information at an average rate of at least 200 kilobits per second in at least one direction. 

‘‘(3) USER.—The term ‘user’ means any person who takes and 

uses broadband network service, whether provided for a fee, in 

exchange for an explicit benefit, or for free.’’. 

(b) SAVINGS PROVISION.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to modify, impair, or supersede the applicability of the antitrust laws, as such term is defined in section 602(e)(4) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. 

In the heading of title II of the bill, strike ‘‘ENFORCEMENT 

OF BROADBAND POLICY STATEMENT’’ and insert ‘‘NETWORK NEUTRALITY’’. 

Conform the table of contents accordingly. 

8. AN AMENDMENT TO BE OFFERED BY REPRESENTATIVE GUTKNECHT OF MINNESOTA, OR HIS DESIGNEE, DEBATABLE FOR 10 

MINUTES

At the end of title III of the bill, add the following new section: 

SEC. 302. COMPENSATION AND CONTRIBUTION. 

(a) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this Act (including the 

amendments made by this Act) shall be construed to exempt a 

VOIP service provider from requirements imposed by the Federal 

Communications Commission or a State commission on all VOIP 

service providers to— 

(1) pay appropriate compensation for the transmission of a 

VOIP service over the facilities and equipment of another provider; or 

(2) contribute on an equitable and non-discriminatory basis 

to the preservation and advancement of universal service. 

(b) DEFINITIONS.—As used in this section— 

(1) the terms ‘‘VOIP service provider’’ and ‘‘VOIP service’’ 

have the meanings given such terms in section 716(h) of the 

Communications Act of 1934, as added by section 301 of this 

Act; and 

(2) the term ‘‘State commission’’ has the meaning given such 

term in section 3 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 

153). 

Æ 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS