Idaho to Draft VoIP Legislation in Uncertain Regulatory Climate
The Idaho legislature plans a VoIP bill next year clarifying whether the state may regulate IP-based services, Senate President Pro Tempore Brent Hill (R) told us Thursday. Responding to a request by Hill and Idaho House Speaker Scott Bedke (R), the Public Utilities Commission this week submitted a report with three legislative options: (1) adopt AT&T-proposed legislation to codify deregulation of all VoIP services, (2) keep the status quo or (3) clarify that interconnected VoIP is included under Idaho public utilities statute. Keeping the status quo might be least risky, the report said. Commissioner Paul Kjellander cautioned state legislators to observe that the recent general election may change federal VoIP treatment.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
While 36 states have deregulated VoIP, it remains a controversial question, said an introduction to the report by Idaho PUC contractor Joe Cusick. "It is an issue that seems to be in constant litigation, as it is currently.” The Vermont Public Service Board is expected to soon rule on state authority over VoIP services (see 1611150014). A federal court in Minnesota will hear argument Jan. 9 on Charter’s lawsuit against the Public Utilities Commission on whether the PUC can regulate the cable operator’s VoIP service (see 1611020037). And Iowa regulators proposed revising the definition of phone utilities that explicitly would exclude IP and VoIP services (see 1611230040).
The Idaho PUC completed the report in time for the next session of the legislature, which meets only from January to March, starting Jan. 9. Hill said he plans to meet soon with Kjellander to discuss the report. “The next steps are that I will have the Commission present the report to the State Affairs Committee in the Senate and Speaker Bedke will choose a similar committee in the House,” the state senator emailed. “After the committee members have been properly briefed, they will probably consider legislation that will be introduced by one or more of the stakeholders or individual legislators may draft their own bill.”
The state commission doesn’t seek to influence legislators’ decision, Kjellander told us Thursday. “It is my hope that the report represents an ‘honest broker’ approach and does not take a specific position on any of the options available to the legislature,” he emailed. “Whether or not the likelihood of any federal action impacts the timing of legislative activity in Idaho is clearly up to state legislators to determine.”
Kjellander noted a dramatic change in the federal landscape since legislators requested the report in March. “The new administration will certainly have a different relationship with Congress, and the composition" of the FCC will change, the Republican commissioner wrote in a cover letter to the report. “While congressional action and directions are always difficult to predict, it is clear that future changes at the FCC will have significant and more immediate impact on the telecommunications sector. Given the recent history that most major FCC decisions were resolved by 3-2 decisions along party lines, a change at the FCC will likely result in new directions as it relates to VoIP and other telecommunications matters. Future FCC decisions will undoubtedly have impacts on jurisdictional matters that are currently administered at that state level.”
The possibility of federal action complicates decisions for state policymakers puzzling over VoIP, and may support keeping things the same, the report said. While not codified into law, the Idaho PUC currently takes a "hands-off" approach to VoIP regulation, it said. "The regulatory uncertainty on the federal level and, consequently, the potential need to make broad changes to the Idaho statutes when these issues are finally decided is the primary reason to maintain the status quo.” Many issues remain unresolved at the federal level, including whether VoIP is a telecom or information service, and intrastate or interstate, the report said. "Depending on decisions at the FCC, states may well want to maintain some jurisdiction over VoIP service. If AT&T's legislation were to be enacted, regaining state jurisdiction becomes an issue.”
The report took shots at the argument that deregulation will spur industry investment. “Nothing has been put forward to demonstrate that broadband deployment is being suppressed by the current regulatory regime,” the PUC report said. “In rural areas broadband deployment lags but not because of regulatory treatment, but by simple economics.” Urban areas of Idaho have strong competition, it said. "Changing the status of VoIP is not likely to significantly impact the future deployment of broadband.”
Industry broadly supported VoIP deregulation, but individual companies disagreed on the conditions, including whether wholesale should be included and if legacy technologies also should get relief, the report said. Cusick commented, “A jaded view might be that deregulation is fine as long as I get what I want.”