Avoid applying needless regulation in any Communications Act update, three Republican members of the Senate Commerce Committee wrote in a joint op-ed for The Hill (http://bit.ly/1lB613u). House Republicans announced their intent to overhaul the landmark Telecom Act of 1996 in December, with action planned for 2014 and 2015. “Unfortunately, some would still have people believe that the only way to provide real consumer choice is to have the federal government dictating how consumers are offered services and what those services might be,” said Sens. Dean Heller of Nevada, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire. “This approach is born from the mindset that regulations beget innovation and that bureaucrats in the government, not entrepreneurship, create competition.” They decried “knee-jerk regulatory prescription” and instead suggested empowering consumers through the promotion of competition. They said they welcome a rewrite of the act and emphasized the technology changes that have happened since 1996.

The House Communications Subcommittee will dig into broadband stimulus projects in a Tuesday hearing, the panel said in a notice. The hearing will be in 2322 Rayburn at 10:30 a.m. Subcommittee Republicans have been frequently critical of the billions in grants given through the Broadband Technology Opportunities Program. “With the five-year anniversary of the law approaching next week, members will revisit the broadband stimulus that has been plagued by mismanagement and poor decision making in order to understand how we can better protect taxpayer dollars in the future,” the notice said. Witnesses weren’t announced.

The basic structure of the Telecom Act of 1996 is “actually quite good” from the perspective of being technology-neutral, state regulators told members of the House Commerce Committee, which is considering overhauling the act. “The problem in many instances is not the Act, but the broad, and some might argue, unwarranted discretion the judiciary has given the FCC to implement it,” NARUC said in joint comments submitted by NARUC President Colette Honorable of Arkansas and Telecom Committee Chairman Chris Nelson, of the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission (http://bit.ly/1dp0bbu). Comments were due to House Commerce Friday, and NARUC released its comments Tuesday. NARUC attacked the way the agency has handled the distinction between telecom and information services, suggesting it has caused problems. NARUC said there are places where the act may need updates but it hasn’t collected its members’ views for any major official positions. Flexibility is already present in the statute, NARUC said: “It is hard to construct a scenario where these existing authorities cannot provide the requisite flexibility.” NARUC said state roles should be preserved in such areas as interconnection: “If VoIP were classified as a ’telecommunications service’ it would be clear that [Communications Act] Sections 251-2 apply to IP interconnections and the arbitration option would be available to smaller carriers that cannot get large carriers to the table to discuss interconnection,” NARUC said. The state regulators flagged the federalism principles that their telecom task force put together as one relevant resource for Congress. The Minority Media and Telecommunications Council, meanwhile, made four recommendations, in comments it released this week. Congress should look at the ways to prioritize and increase opportunities for minority and women’s business enterprise ownership and participation and to promote the goals of broadcast diversity, MMTC said. It emphasized what it called “first-class digital citizenship for people of color” and highlighted broadband access and adoption and called for clarification of laws that may affect broadband infrastructure development. Universal service also plays a role, it said.

Sen. Dean Heller, R-Nev., introduced the FCC Process Reform Act (http://1.usa.gov/1aoET2N) Tuesday. The bill originated in the House and cleared the House Commerce Committee by unanimous voice vote in December. Heller’s Senate bill mirrors the committee-cleared House version, a bipartisan compromise. “This bill will help create an FCC that is more transparent and predictable, and provide individuals and businesses in the communications and technology sectors with the certainty they need to invest in infrastructure and grow their businesses,” Heller said in a statement (http://1.usa.gov/1eQDEFm). The bill would require the FCC to take account of the marketplace before rulemakings, assess its performance measures, limit the way the agency can apply conditions imposed on transactions, enhance agency transparency and change sunshine rules to allow a bipartisan majority of FCC commissioners to meet, among other changes. He has introduced similar legislation before, as well as the FCC Consolidated Reporting Act, which passed the House unanimously last fall and has since received zero traction in the Senate. Heller lamented the way the Senate Commerce Committee, of which he is a member, has not taken up such legislation. “The fact that the FCC took up this issue up last week during its Open Meeting combined with the proactivity of the House Committee, it is now incumbent on the Senate Committee to act,” a Heller spokesman told us by email. Heller has applauded the way FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler has engaged in process reform, issuing a laudatory statement following the last FCC open meeting (http://1.usa.gov/1frFONa). Heller believes “the Senate voice is being muted on this debate” and that Senate Commerce members “should play a role,” the spokesman said. Heller is pressing Senate Commerce Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., and the entire committee “both privately and publicly” and is working to build bill support among Republican colleagues, the spokesman said. Rockefeller issued a statement in December after the House bill’s committee clearance saying Congress should seek the FCC’s guidance before embarking on any FCC operation overhauls. Sen. Dan Coats, R-Ind., signed on as a co-sponsor since the bill’s introduction, the spokesman said.

The Senate passed the conferenced version of HR-2642, known commonly as the farm bill, on Tuesday in a 68-32 vote. The conference report includes provisions on a rural gigabit pilot program and broadband deployment. The National League of Cities applauded the passage and urged President Barack Obama to sign the bill into law as soon as possible. Obama released a statement saying the bill “isn’t perfect,” but lauding the “positive difference” it would make. Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., touted the broadband provisions he helped fight to include in the bill. The provisions would allow the Rural Utilities Service to better target its broadband loans to unserved and underserved rural areas, requiring at least 15 percent of households in a proposed service region qualify as unserved or underserved, his office said (http://1.usa.gov/1fMLV0n). The provision said the minimum acceptable service level is 4 Mbps upload/1 Mbps download and also tightened the reporting requirements. “I've been working with GAO and the [Inspector General]at [the U.S. Department of Agriculture] on reforms for some time, and I'm glad that we've been able to have this language included in the bipartisan Farm Bill,” Warner said in a statement. “When I was Governor, we launched one of the country’s largest rural broadband projects in Southside, and Virginians recognize that access to broadband helps spur economic growth and create jobs.” Virginia Secretary of Technology Karen Jackson praised the Warner broadband provisions, in a statement.

A high-ranking House Republican spurned the net neutrality bill introduced by her Democratic colleagues (CD Feb 4 p1). The bicameral legislation would restore, at least until the agency acts on a court remand, the net neutrality rules that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit struck down in a mid-January decision. “If the FCC follows through on President [Barack] Obama’s wishes they will be constructing an Internet Iron Curtain that will restrict our online freedom and serve as an industry job-killer,” House Commerce Committee Vice Chairman Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., said in a statement Monday night. “It’s more than ironic that the same Administration that can’t figure out how to make Healthcare.Gov work now thinks that regulating the Internet like China and Russia will make things better for American consumers.” The bill, introduced Monday, is expected to be widely opposed by Republicans.

The House Homeland Security Committee will mark up the National Cybersecurity and Critical Infrastructure Protection Act (HR-3696) Wednesday. The bill would primarily codify the Department of Homeland Security’s existing authority on cybersecurity issues, but not give DHS new powers. The House Cybersecurity Subcommittee passed the bill in a mid-January markup, which added new language on data breaches, cybersecurity workforce development and DHS’s SAFETY Act office (CD Jan 16 p6). The markup is set to begin at 10 a.m. in 311 Cannon.

The U.S. “may not be as far behind the curve on virtual currencies” as previously thought, said Senate Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Tom Carper, D-Del., in a news release in response to a Law Library of Congress report (http://bit.ly/1eladR1) on digital currencies released Monday. The report surveyed the legal standing of virtual currencies, like Bitcoin, in 40 countries and the EU. “Significantly, this report shows that other countries have addressed how virtual currencies are taxed, and I urge the Internal Revenue [Service] to glean the findings from this survey to help determine its own treatment of virtual currencies,” said Carper.

At least two members will vie for the top Democrat spot on the House Commerce Committee, as some expected last week when ranking member Henry Waxman, D-Calif., announced plans to retire at the end of his term (CD Jan 31 p5). In order of seniority, the next Democrats on the committee are John Dingell, Mich.; Frank Pallone, N.J.; Bobby Rush, Ill.; and Anna Eshoo, Calif., ranking member of the Communications Subcommittee. Since Waxman’s retirement announcement, “I have received the encouragement of members of the Committee and the Caucus to seek this position,” Eshoo said in a statement Monday (http://1.usa.gov/1aWCMUm). “I do so with great enthusiasm because it is the ‘Committee of the Future’ and the most dynamic by its jurisdictions. It is key to shaping America’s future, just as my Silicon Valley congressional district is.” But Pallone, more senior than Eshoo on House Commerce, is also interested. After learning of Waxman’s retirement, “I began the process of calling my colleagues to let them know of my intentions,” Pallone also said in a statement Monday (http://1.usa.gov/1fp3O3B). He believes himself the committee Democrat with “the most effective voice” to lead the committee. “Having a leader with strong relationships on both sides of the aisle will be crucial to moving forward a meaningful agenda,” Pallone said. Dingell, a former House Commerce chairman and ranking member, still did not weigh in on his decision Monday. “I'm boarding a flight back to Washington now, but nothing has changed since my statement last week,” Dingell told us in a statement, saying he looks “forward to continuing to give this thoughtful consideration, speaking with my colleagues upon my return, and from there I will find the absolute best ways” to serve constituents.

House Republicans want answers from the FCC on its budget and operations. Republican members of the House Commerce Committee’s Communications and Oversight subcommittees sent the agency a letter Friday laying out several questions (http://1.usa.gov/1fsydQj). The letter emphasized fiscal responsibility. “In our committee’s oversight role, we are looking at the operating budget of the FCC with a focus on expenditures designated as [spectrum] auction-related expenses, as well as employee distribution and compensation more generally,” the Republicans said. They seek more information about how the FCC contracts out work. The agency is reviewing the letter now, a spokesman said.