I
107TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION
H. R. 1698
To ensure the application of the antitrust laws to local telephone monopolies;
and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MAY 3, 2001
Mr. CANNON (for himself, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. ISSA, and Mr. NADLER) intro-
duced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Ju-
diciary, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for
a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for
consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the com-
mittee concerned
A BILL
To ensure the application of the antitrust laws to local
telephone monopolies; and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘American Broadband
Competition Act of 2001’’.
SEC. 2. AMENDMENT TO THE CLAYTON ACT ON THE APPLI-
CABILITY OF THE ANTITRUST LAWS TO CER-
TAIN VIOLATIONS IN THE TELECOMMUNI-
CATIONS INDUSTRY.
The Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 12 et seq.) is amended
by adding at the end the following:
‘‘SEC. 28. (a) In any action based on a claim arising
under the antitrust laws—
‘‘(1) the court shall not dismiss such claim on
the ground that the defendant’s conduct was or is
subject to the Communications Act of 1934 (47
U.S.C. 101 et seq.), or that such Act takes prece-
dence over, because of its specificity or recency of
enactment, the antitrust laws; and
‘‘(2) the trier of fact may consider any conduct
that violates any obligations or requirements im-
posed by the Communications Act of 1934 (47
U.S.C. 101 et seq.), or rules adopted pursuant
thereto, in determining whether the defendant has
engaged in anticompetitive or exclusionary conduct.
‘‘SEC. 29. (a) If an adjudicatory body determines that
an incumbent local exchange carrier in any particular
State has violated section 251, 252, 271, or 272 of the
Communications Act of 1934, or any rules promulgated
pursuant to such sections, such carrier shall be deemed
to have violated the antitrust laws.
‘‘(b) In addition to any penalty that may be imposed
under any other provision of law, such carrier and all af-
filiates of such carrier may not jointly market in such
State any advanced telecommunications service with any
other telecommunications or information services offered
by such carrier or by any of such affiliates.
‘‘(c) Not later than 1 year after the enactment of the
American Broadband Competition Act of 2001, the Attor-
ney General shall submit a report to the Committee on
the Judiciary of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate—
‘‘(1) identifying suits brought under this sec-
tion; and
‘‘(2) describing the effect that the enforcement
of this section has had on competitiveness in the
telecommunication marketplace.’’.
SEC. 3. ESTABLISHMENT OF AN ALTERNATIVE PROCESS TO
RESOLVE DISPUTES.
(a) AMENDMENT.—Title 9 of the United States Code
is amended by inserting after section 16 the following:
‘‘§17. Disputes arising under interconnection agree-
ments
‘‘(a) INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT CONTROVER-
SIES SUBJECT
TO ARBITRATION.—Any interconnection
agreement entered into pursuant to section 252 of the
Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 252) shall be
treated for purposes of this chapter as a contract con-
taining a written provision to settle by arbitration a con-
troversy thereafter arising out of such contract. Any such
controversy shall be subject to arbitration in accordance
with the alternate dispute resolution process established
pursuant to this section.
‘‘(b) ESTABLISHMENT REQUIRED.—Within 90 days
after enactment of the American Broadband Competition
Act of 2001, the Attorney General shall prescribe a
multistate alternative dispute resolution process. The At-
torney General shall not include either the Federal Com-
munications Commission nor any State commission as a
party to such dispute resolution process.
‘‘(c) CRITERIA FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF PROCESS.—
The multistate alternative dispute resolution process re-
quired by this section shall—
‘‘(1) provide for a private, commercial arbitra-
tion process that will permit a requesting tele-
communications carrier to resolve a dispute related
to an interconnection agreement with an incumbent
local exchange carrier arising in 1 or several States
in an open, nondiscriminatory, and unbiased fashion
within 45 days after the filing of such dispute;
‘‘(2) incorporate the Commercial Dispute Reso-
lution Procedures of the American Arbitration Asso-
ciation in effect at the date of enactment of the
American Broadband Competition Act of 2001 to
the extent consistent with the time limits imposed in
this section, except that all decisions of arbitration
panels constituted pursuant to this section shall be
in writing, publicly available, and posted on the
Internet;
‘‘(3) permit all parties to have the right to dis-
covery; and
‘‘(4) ensure requesting telecommunications car-
riers do not file frivolous disputes, and establish
penalties to deter such conduct.
‘‘(d) AUTHORITY OF ARBITRATION PANELS.—Except
as otherwise provided in this section, awards and decisions
of such arbitration panels shall be enforceable in Federal
district courts pursuant to the procedures of this chapter.
‘‘(e) NO COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL.—The parties to
the controversy shall be bound by the decision of the arbi-
tration panel as to the matter in controversy under the
interconnection agreement entered into pursuant to sec-
tion 252 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C.
252), but otherwise such decision shall not have the effect
of collateral estoppel in any other proceeding involving any
of such parties.
‘‘(f) OTHER REMEDIES NOT LIMITED.—Except as
provided in subsection (e), the availability of alternative
dispute resolution pursuant to this section shall not—
‘‘(1) limit any other remedy a requesting tele-
communications carrier might have for the same or
similar facts, including relief before the Attorney
General of the United States, the Federal Commu-
nications Commission or State commissions (as de-
fined by section 3 of the Communications Act of
1934), courts of the United States, or any other ap-
propriate forum; or
‘‘(2) modify, affect, or supersede the authority
and responsibility of the Federal Communications
Commission to expeditiously administer and enforce
the Communications Act of 1934.’’.
(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The table of sec-
tions of chapter 1 of title 9 is amended by inserting after
the item relating to section 16 the following:
‘‘17. Disputes arising under interconnection agreements.’’.
Æ