Eight House members signed on Thursday as co-sponsors to the Local Radio Freedom Act (H. Con. Res. 16), which opposes new performance royalties, according to Congress.gov (http://1.usa.gov/1mKPXwI). Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, also added his name Thursday as a co-sponsor to the Senate’s concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 6), it said (http://1.usa.gov/1cfZEyO). Reps. Bruce Braley, D-Iowa; Corrine Brown, D-Fla.; Larry Bucshon, R-Ind.; Andre Carson, D-Ind.; John Carter R-Texas; Ann Kirkpatrick, D-Ariz.; Nick Rahall, D-W.Va.; and Jackie Walorski, R-Ind., are the most recent House co-sponsors of the bill, it said. A total of 201 House members and 13 senators support the bill, NAB said in a press release Friday (http://bit.ly/1cfWwTz).

Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., asked FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler to question Comcast’s past compliance behavior in reviewing any Comcast-Time Warner Cable deal, he said in a letter Thursday (http://1.usa.gov/1gHxA4k), citing Comcast’s previous acquisition of NBCUniversal. “To the extent that Comcast has a history of breaching its legal obligations to consumers, such history should be taken into account when evaluating Comcast’s proposal for future market expansion,” Franken wrote. Wheeler’s inquiries should include net neutrality, localism, affordable stand-alone broadband, data caps and network neighborhoods, Franken recommended. Franken has emphasized the deal in his Senate campaign, and it has also become a campaign issue for Ro Khanna, a Democrat running for a House seat in California and widely hailed by the tech industry. The deal would cause “unprecedented concentration in the cable TV industry,” Khanna wrote in a letter (http://bit.ly/MBMJuv) to Rep. Mike Honda, D-Calif., Khanna’s incumbent competitor. “I believe it is imperative for Members of Congress to speak out against this merger because the interests of consumers are being overwhelmed by Comcast’s power on Capitol Hill.” Lawmakers in the House and Senate Judiciary committees have announced intentions to hold hearings on the deal. Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, expects the House Commerce Committee to hold a hearing on the deal, scrutinizing local issues where there may be market dominance problems. “We would tend to be receptive,” Barton said of how Congress will receive the deal, speaking on an episode of C-SPAN’s The Communicators that was set to be telecast Saturday. (See separate report in this issue.) Asked about Franken’s letter, Comcast defended its efforts. “Comcast is proud of our track-record on complying with the conditions from our past transactions including NBCUniversal,” a spokeswoman said in a statement. “We've gone above and beyond in compliance with most conditions, including our low-income broadband program, the amount of local news programming and investment in local stations, the amount of on-demand programming, especially children’s programming, and many more areas.” Executive Vice President David Cohen has also argued in favor of the company in blog posts on compliance conditions, such as a post a year ago (http://bit.ly/1hJyWMO).

Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., introduced the Transparency in Assertion of Patents Act Thursday to give the FTC additional authority to regulate patent assertion entities’ use of pre-litigation demand letters against potential lawsuit defendants. The FTC currently has power under Section 5 of the FTC Act to protect small businesses, end-users and others against deceptive demand letters. McCaskill’s bill would give the FTC further authority on demand letters, allowing the agency to create and enforce demand letter rules, including requiring disclosure about the identity of the owners of the enforced patent, the patent claims in question, how a proposed settlement was calculated and information on past litigation involving the patent. The bill would also allow the FTC to regulate unfair and deceptive assertions included in a demand letter, and would require the commission to increase public awareness about “unfair and deceptive patent assertions.” The bill would exempt disclosure of existing licensing agreements and other information the FTC determines “is not necessary for the protection of consumers.” The bill would also allow state attorneys general to take action in federal courts against an entity that violates the bill’s rules (http://1.usa.gov/1mIvoNQ). McCaskill, who leads the Senate Consumer Protection Subcommittee, said in a subcommittee hearing in November that she was exploring a bill targeting demand letters that would specifically address “end users and consumer protection” (CD Nov 8 p13). Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., said in a statement that he’s co-sponsoring the bill because it “cracks down on the commercial practice of mailing hundreds, if not thousands, of misleading letters that seek to extort money from small businesses. The bill isn’t about patent law or patent rights; it’s simply about protecting unsuspecting victims from bad actors and their despicable behavior."

The Senate should consider creating a select committee to focus on cybersecurity, Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Angus King, I-Maine, said Thursday during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing. Congress has been considering several bills that would address cybersecurity, including a House-passed version of the controversial Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (HR-624), but industry observers have noted few prospects for marquee legislation to pass Congress during the remainder of the 113th Congress (CD Jan 6 p2). A select committee would be useful because “one of the biggest problems we face is that this issue crosses many jurisdictional lines of different committees,” McCain said during the hearing. King said he agreed with McCain, noting that it would be a “procedural” solution to continued disagreements on the issue between the Senate committees handling cybersecurity, including Homeland Security, Intelligence and Commerce. If the U.S. experiences a cyber “Pearl Harbor” in the near future “and we haven’t done anything, we're going to look pretty dumb around here,” he said. Keith Alexander, National Security Agency director and commander of U.S. Cyber Command, told the committee he believed having a committee “that pulls all that together would make a lot of sense.” Alexander said during the hearing that Congress needs to “get on with cyber legislation,” adding that “a lack of legislation will impact our ability to defend the country in this area.”

House members want the FCC to kick off a proceeding on below-the-line fees, backing more disclosure. House Communications Subcommittee ranking member Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., drafted the letter to the agency, signed by members of both parties. “We believe consumers deserve greater transparency and disclosure prior to signing-up for service, as well as on their monthly bill,” it said. “CTIA’s Consumer Code for Wireless Service, which articulates a variety of principles, disclosures and practices for postpaid and prepaid wireless service, expressly provides for the disclosure of the type of fees that Congresswoman Eshoo’s letter addresses,” said Vice President-Government Affairs Jot Carpenter in a statement. “We have no reason to believe that any of our members are failing to abide by this commitment and have communicated as much to the members of Congress who signed the letter. Besides, the vigorous competition that characterizes the wireless industry encourages both disclosure and price discipline."

Two House members announced the creation of a spectrum caucus Thursday. Reps. Brett Guthrie, R-Ky., and Doris Matsui, D-Calif., will be co-chairs. They have headed the House Communications Subcommittee’s spectrum working group and introduced spectrum legislation together before. Matsui said it will be an “important mechanism for our colleagues and congressional staff to engage on the spectrum policies, both licensed and unlicensed, facing our economy.” CTIA Vice President-Government Affairs Jot Carpenter lauded the move in a statement. Matsui and Guthrie “know that spectrum isn’t just what drives the wireless industry, it’s increasingly what drives the economy,” he said.

The House passed HR-1123, the Unlocking Consumer Choice and Wireless Competition Act, by a vote of 295-114, despite last-minute revolt from a few members. The latest version of the bill was different from the one passed by committee, and it no longer addressed bulk unlocking, prompting active resistance from some members and the loss of support from Public Knowledge and the Electronic Frontier Foundation. The bill “protects consumer choice by allowing consumers flexibility when it comes to choosing a wireless carrier,” said bill author House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., in a statement following the bill’s passage. “This is something that Americans have been asking for and I am pleased that the House of Representatives acted to restore the exemption that will allow consumers to unlock their cell phones.” Public Knowledge is happy consumers would be able to unlock their phones but “language recently added to the bill could be interpreted to make future unlocking efforts more difficult,” said Vice President-Legal Affairs Sherwin Siy, saying the group is “hopeful” the legislation can be changed in the Senate. Of the 295 members voting for the bill, 200 were Republicans and 95 were Democrats, and of those voting against it, 20 were Republicans and 94 were Democrats.

Advertising tax deductibility is again at issue, among many other provisions, in a House proposal to revamp U.S. tax code. House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich., issued the discussion draft Wednesday. “Under the provision, 50 percent of certain advertising expenses would be currently deductible and 50 percent would be amortized ratably over a ten-year period,” said the Ways and Means explanatory analysis of the draft (http://1.usa.gov/1hpq8wG). “This rule would phase in for tax years beginning before 2018 as follows: for tax years beginning in 2015, 80 percent of advertising costs would be deductible and 20 percent amortized; in 2016, 70 percent of advertising costs would be deductible and 30 percent amortized; and in 2017, 60 percent of advertising costs would be deductible and 40 percent amortized.” Advertising expenses are treated as business expenses now, it said. In November, NAB issued a statement saying it was strongly opposes “limits that would be placed on the ability of businesses to annually deduct costs for advertising.” The Camp analysis said the provision would “increase revenues by $169.0 billion over 2014-2023.” NAB slammed the provision in Camp’s draft. “NAB strongly opposes any job-killing proposal that would limit the ability of thousands of large and small businesses from fully deducting their annual advertising expenses,” NAB Executive Vice President Dennis Wharton said in a statement. “Advertising on local radio and television stations is a key driver of the American economy -- indeed, a recent study found local broadcast advertising generates $1.05 trillion in GDP and supports 1.48 million jobs.” The association will lobby “to ensure the advertising tax deduction continues to create economic prosperity and well-paying jobs,” Wharton said. USTelecom President Walter McCormick called the overall draft “a critical first step” and mentioned that it included “lowering the corporate tax rate to make U.S. companies more competitive in the world economy.”

The “inconsistent patchwork” of state telehealth laws “hinders the natural deployment of telehealth,” said Rep. Doris Matsui, D-Calif., at an Information Technology and Innovation Foundation event Wednesday. Matsui and Rep. Bill Johnson, R-Ohio, introduced the Telehealth Modernization Act in December (http://1.usa.gov/1mCyJy4) in the hopes of bringing clarity by creating a federal definition of telehealth. “By establishing a workable federal definition of federal health, I'm hopeful states will look to this legislation for guidance in developing clear and consistent telehealth principles that benefit the nation as a whole,” Johnson said. Telehealth has received increased attention, with consumer advocates expressing concern about the practice’s privacy protections and about what they call a lack of government oversight. Matsui and Johnson’s bill would not address either issue, but Johnson stressed “privacy needs to be central” to any telehealth policy that states develop. “We've got hackers who hack into our databases; what’s to keep intruders from hacking into a telehealth session?” he said. But the first step is laying out a telehealth definition and principles “using a highest common denominator approach,” Matsui said. In the last year, more than 40 states have considered varying types of telehealth legislation, she said, creating market confusion that hinders telehealth for minorities, seniors and the disabled, which telehealth benefits. “Telehealth is, and will continue to be, invaluable in helping to resolve some of our nation’s most pressing health disparities,” she said.

Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., is an “original co-sponsor” of the Songwriter Equity Act, (H.R. 4079) legislation that was announced Tuesday (CD Feb 26 p13) by sponsor Rep. Doug Collins, R-Ga., said a Jeffries press release Wednesday (http://1.usa.gov/1pupoun). Jeffries initially withdrew his support for the bill at the “11th hour,” but reaffirmed his commitment by close of business Tuesday, said his spokeswoman. “The Songwriter Equity Act endeavors to modernize the music licensing system by updating provisions in the Copyright Act of 1976 to ensure songwriters are fairly compensated for their creative work,” said Jeffries in the release.