The Florida House voted 70-38 to remove an exemption for theme park owners from its social media law. Many Democrats voted no while loudly demonstrating against redistricting bills passed earlier that day. SB-6 “is the bill repealing the carveout that every Democrat voted to oppose last year,” said Rep. Alex Andrade (R) before the webcast vote. The Senate passed it Wednesday, a day after Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) asked legislators to remove special districts and privileges for Disney in Florida in response to the company’s opposition to HB-1557, what opponents call the “Don’t Say Gay” law (see 2204200047). The governor’s office didn’t comment on when DeSantis would sign. Oral argument is scheduled for next Thursday on the underlying social media law at the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. With Congress not passing any “meaningful” online content regulations, “state governments have begun experimenting with ways to regulate online expression,” said a University of North Carolina Center on Technology Policy report released Thursday. “On the right, legislators have introduced dozens of bills addressing what they see as problematic online censorship. On the left, legislators have introduced a series of bills addressing what they see as harmful online content. Yet, state legislation from both Democrats and Republicans faces significant legal and practical challenges, limiting the efficacy of state government reform efforts to date.” Asked Thursday about his support for the amended bill, FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr disputed that the removal of the theme park exemption was a response to Disney’s political speech. The proclamation calling for a special session to amend the bill frames the change as a response to the courts criticizing the original legislation for giving Disney special status, Carr said on a press call. “Eliminating that legal vulnerability made sense,” he said.
California regulators scaled back price and speed requirements proposed for a $2 billion last-mile federal funding account (FFA) required by the state’s $6 billion broadband law. The California Public Utilities Commission voted 5-0 at a livestreamed Thursday meeting to adopt CPUC President Alice Reynolds’ revised proposed decision released Wednesday.
The Oregon Public Utility Commission will open a rulemaking to update state USF rules. Commissioners voted 3-0 Tuesday to adopt staff's recommendation in docket AR 649. Telecom industry groups gave mixed reviews last month to the PUC’s plan to adopt a CostQuest model to decide the size of the Oregon USF (OUSF) starting Jan. 1 (see 2203310040). Deciding to issue an NPRM is merely a “jumping-off point” for the rulemaking, reminded Chair Megan Decker at Tuesday’s virtual PUC meeting. The PUC signed a contract earlier in the week to use a CostQuest model, said PUC senior telecom analyst Nicola Peterson. But the proposed NPRM is a framework to move forward while allowing input, she said. "I don't think putting it off is going to help make it an easier process." The Oregon Telecommunications Association doesn’t want to open a rulemaking that says the PUC will use a model when it doesn’t yet understand the model’s potential results, said OTA attorney Rick Finnigan: The PUC should take more time. "This is important and we need to get it right," he said. The Oregon Cable Telecommunications Association supports moving forward because it thinks the proposed framework is “flexible enough” to let parties work with the model, said Davis Wright’s Mark Trinchero. Commissioner Mark Thompson supported moving forward, while sympathizing with OTA’s concerns. “It is resonating with me that it feels a little weird to ... adopt a rule that says we're going to use a cost model when there seems to be concerns that we really don't know what that cost model is going to produce.” Commissioner Letha Tawney said she sees “outs” for the commission if “this goes off the rails.” Concerned parties should proactively engage, she said.
Democratic and Republican Connecticut senators supported privacy legislation Wednesday. The Senate didn't vote by our deadline on the comprehensive SB-6, but it was widely supported during debate. Modeled after Colorado’s privacy law, the Connecticut bill would next need a House vote. "Technology advances faster than our ability to regulate it, and this will be a constant process to make sure that we're getting it right,” but it's important now to protect consumers, said SB-6 sponsor and General Law Committee Chairman James Maroney (D) at the livestreamed floor session. Committee ranking member Kevin Witkos (R) supported the amended bill, saying it’s “absolutely the case” that SB-6 is consumer-friendly. It’s like Colorado’s bipartisan-passed law but with stronger protection for children, he said. Witkos said he opposed an earlier version at committee stage because of “too many concerns” from industry, but Maroney addressed “99%” of those issues. Sen. Ryan Fazio (R) praised how Maroney balanced rights for consumers and small businesses. The amended SB-6 would be enforced by the state attorney general. If enacted, the proposed law would take effect July 1, 2023, and require a 60-day right to cure through Dec. 31, 2024, said Maroney: After that date, it would be up to the AG to decide whether to provide a cure period. After Jan. 1, 2025, companies would have to honor global opt-out signals from browsers, he said. The privacy bill cleared the Appropriations Committee earlier this week (see 2204190015).
Nontraditional providers are key to expanding broadband and making it affordable, said Commissioner Darcie Houck at a California Public Utilities Commission event Tuesday. At the California Advanced Services Fund (CASF) virtual workshop, a municipal broadband panel urged the commission to dismiss industry naysayers.
Wireless carriers balked at a California Public Utilities Commission staff plan to restrict subscribers from combining state low-income support with federal affordable connectivity program (ACP) benefits for mobile plans. The CPUC received comments Thursday in docket R.20-02-008 on interaction among California LifeLine, federal Lifeline and ACP. The plan “is inconsistent with and preempted by applicable federal law, violates California law governing the state’s LifeLine program, and ignores relevant facts regarding subscribers’ wireless data needs,” said the National Lifeline Association.
Two Oklahoma bills meant to empower rural electric cooperatives to provide broadband cleared the Senate Business, Commerce and Tourism Committee at a livestreamed hearing Thursday. The panel voted 11-0 for HB-3835 setting maximum pole-attachment rates when cooperatives and communications companies can’t agree to a negotiated rate. “All parties are giving up something,” sponsor Sen. Brent Howard (R) told the committee. “None of them are real happy about it, but none of them are against it.” The committee later voted 11-0 for HB-1123 prohibiting class-action lawsuits by landowners against companies seeking to expand usage of easements for broadband. On Wednesday in Kentucky, the House voted 73-22 and the Senate voted 20-14 to override a partial veto by Gov. Andy Beshear (D) of HB-315. Beshear objected to an emergency clause in the bill to set up a state broadband office with $300 million from the 2021 American Rescue Plan Act (see 2204120040).
The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission will keep watching Frontier Communications, said members, as they closed an investigation into the company’s “virtual separation” at a partially virtual meeting Thursday. Union officials urged commissioners to keep docket 21-150 open due to their concerns about Frontier investment and workforce levels. Commissioners adopted a decision seeking more information on those subjects in existing Frontier service-quality docket 18-122, where they said oversight will continue.
Regulatory Commission of Alaska members voted 4-0, with one member absent, to seek comments on Alaska USF (AUSF) proposals by RCA staff and the Alaska Remote Carrier Coalition (ARCC). Comments will be due in 30 days, replies 20 days later, commissioners decided at a Wednesday virtual meeting. Chairman Bob Pickett said he will bring commissioners back April 27 to discuss staff questions, including on AUSF’s role and future funding amounts and methods. While not opposing taking extra comment, Pickett said he hopes the proceeding won’t stretch until fall. “This thing needs to be resolved ASAP.” Progress was “limited” at last month’s technical conference on the staff proposal (see 2203180066), RCA Common Carrier Specialist David Parrish told commissioners. It’s time for the "commission to make some tough policy calls,” he said. It appears support is needed, but it’s difficult for RCA members to tell how much support is required in the state that deregulated telecom, said Commissioner Antony Scott. Commissioners agreed the RCA’s limited authority to compel specific relevant data is a challenge. The ARCC filed an alternative proposal Tuesday, the second it filed in docket R-21-001. It proposes a voice connections-based contribution method and distributing most statewide support to remote areas disconnected from roads. It would defer for five years addressing middle-mile transport cost support so the state can assess the impact of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
Ohio justices asked why a city went to court rather than the legislature to collect franchise fees from over-the-top streaming video services. The Ohio Supreme Court held oral argument Wednesday on litigation between Maple Heights, Ohio, and Netflix and Hulu (case 2021-0864). Some justices appeared skeptical that Netflix and Hulu are video service providers that must pay franchise fees under Ohio’s 2007 law.