Rep. Tim Walberg (R-MI) sounded the alarm over concerns that Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chair Jessica Rosenworcel “misled the public” about her proposed net neutrality rules.
In late September Rosenworcel and her Democrat majority at the FCC led the effort to revive the controversial Obama-era net neutrality rules.
During her press conference announcing the proposed net neutrality rules, the FCC chairwoman said that the rules would be about having the internet stay “open and fair” even though her proposed Title II regulations would lead to greater regulatory authority over the internet.
Essentially, net neutrality regulations seek to prohibit internet service providers (ISPs) such as Comcast or Verizon from blocking or slowing down internet traffic or allowing for “paid prioritization,” by which users can pay for faster, more consistent service.
However, her proposed net neutrality rules conflict with her congressional testimony. During a House Energy and Commerce hearing in March 2022, Rosenworcel testified that she does not support rate regulation:
Mr. Walberg: Chairwoman Rosenworcel, my final question is I want to follow up on an answer you gave to Leader Rodgers’s question earlier about rate regulation. I just want to make sure that there aren’t any hidden asterisks in your statement when you say, “no rate regulation.” Are you including within that a commitment not to apply section 201 and 202’s just and reasonable provisions to broadband rates, either before or after the fact?
Ms. Rosenworcel: There is no asterisks.
Mr. Walberg: No asterisks. I am glad to hear that.
In March 2022, FCC Chair Rosenworcel said there were no intentions to reinstate failed rate regulation policies. Now, it’s a main feature of her plan.
It’s not acceptable to say one thing under oath, and then do another while harming the freedom and innovation of our Internet. pic.twitter.com/cUKqcxM4a2
— Rep. Tim Walberg (@RepWalberg) October 6, 2023
Rate regulation would essentially set prices that broadband providers could set for consumers.
Lawrence Spiwak, the president of the Phoenix Center for Advanced Legal & Economic Public Policy Studies, wrote in 2017 that rate regulation is at the core of net neutrality:
Why are these statutory provisions important? Because at bottom, net neutrality is nothing more than good old-fashioned rate regulation. Accordingly, if you are going to impose rate regulation, then Title II prescribes certain rules you must adhere to in order to ensure that the regulated firms’ Fifth Amendment due process rights are not violated.
Walberg, in a letter to Rosenworcel obtained by Breitbart News, sounded the alarm that Rosenworcel’s proposed rules may conflict with her testimony:
I am writing to express concerns that you misled the public and were not truthful in your Congressional testimony. Specifically, your plan for increasing government control of the Internet by regulating broadband under Title I of the Communications Act, which you released last week, directly contradicts your previous testimony. In particular, you testified that you do not support rate regulation, but in your plan, you expressly include and in fact, propose that policy. This raises serious questions.
He then noted that the FCC’s September 26, 2023, fact sheet states that “policies like rate regulation … would be strictly prohibited.”
However, in the FCC’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for the net neutrality rules, the FCC Democrats expressly back rate regulation:
We believe that Commission ex ante rate regulation is unnecessary because we will be able to rely on sections 201 and 202 to address issues on an ex post basis. While we do not propose to for bear from sections 201 and 202 of the Act, we ‘do not and cannot envision adopting new ex ante rate regulation’ of BIAS, and we therefore propose to forbear from applying sections 201 and 202 to BIAS insofar as they would support adoption of ex ante rate regulations for BlAS. We seek comment on this proposal. [Emphasis added]
“The future of the Internet in the United States should be focused on freedom, openness, and innovation, not more government control,” Walberg concluded in his letter to Rosenworcel. “Given the material nature of your statements to Congress, I request that you address this misrepresentation before the FCC votes on your plan.”
Sean Moran is a policy reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter @SeanMoran3.