Sens. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and Cory Booker, D-N.J., introduced the Wi-Fi Innovation Act to much praise. S-2505, announced by Rubio earlier this month as part of his focus on spectrum, would require the FCC to test the feasibility of using the 5850-5925 GHz spectrum for unlicensed use, a Rubio news release said Friday (http://1.usa.gov/1pmiB4p). The FCC would have to “conduct testing that would provide more spectrum to the public and ultimately put the resource to better use, while recognizing the future needs and important work being done in intelligent transportation,” Rubio said. The legislation also “authorizes an important study of Wi-Fi deployment in low income communities and the barriers preventing deployment of wireless broadband in those neighborhoods,” Booker said. CEA, the Computer & Communications Industry Association and CTIA back the legislation, they said Friday. The bill “will serve as clear action plan to properly allocate a finite and increasingly necessary public resource,” said NCTA Director-Digital Strategy John Solit in a blog post (http://bit.ly/1pmk5vD). Public Knowledge also lauded the bill. Senior Vice President Harold Feld called it “a road map for agencies to move forward that respects both the need for wireless capacity for safer ’smart cars’ and the need for more open spectrum for the internet of things,” according to a statement the group issued. “If passed, the bill would resolve an ugly traffic jam between the FCC and the Department of Transportation (DoT) that is needlessly delaying the next generation of Wi-Fi technology.” But the Intelligent Transportation Society of America was more cautious. It “supports the collaborative effort, which is already underway, to explore whether a technical solution exists that would allow Wi-Fi devices to operate in the 5.9 GHz band without interfering with these critical safety applications,” President Scott Belcher said. “But this process should be allowed to proceed without arbitrary deadlines, restrictive parameters or political pressure that could influence the outcome."

Don’t wait for Congress to stop government bulk surveillance of phone records, Sens. Mark Udall, D-Colo., Martin Heinrich, D-N.M., and Ron Wyden, D-Ore., told President Barack Obama in a letter Friday (http://bit.ly/1nT7ikA). They applauded Obama’s move to end government surveillance but worry the House-passed version of the amended USA Freedom Act, HR-3361, is now too weak, they said. Congressional action is needed, but Obama “need not wait to end the dragnet collection of millions of Americans’ phone records,” they said, calling it “an imperative that cannot wait.”

Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., “has been the epitome of a leader during his time in the Congress,” the American Television Alliance said, congratulating Scalise on his ascension to GOP whip Thursday (CD June 20 p11), replacing Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., who was elected majority leader. “We have seen up close how he puts policy knowledge and political skill to use for the benefit of functioning markets that help consumers.” ATVA mentioned how Scalise introduced the Next Generation Television Marketplace Act (HR-3720), “a comprehensive video reform bill that repeals many outdated laws that currently govern the video marketplace” and that has the backing of ATVA. The group’s members include the American Cable Association, DirecTV, Dish, the New America Foundation, NTCA, Time Warner Cable and USTelecom. It has aggressively lobbied Congress to revamp retransmission consent rules this year as part of Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act reauthorization, an effort that broadcasters have consistently opposed. Scalise is a member of the Communications Subcommittee and had campaigned against a clean STELA bill.

Three witnesses will spend Tuesday testifying at both oversight hearings on AT&T’s proposed acquisition of DirecTV. The House Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee will hold the first at 10:30 a.m. in 2141 Rayburn, and the Senate Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee will hold the second at 2:30 p.m. in 226 Dirksen. AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson, DirecTV CEO Michael White and American Cable Association Senior Vice President-Government Affairs Ross Lieberman are scheduled to testify at both. The House hearing will also include Public Knowledge Senior Staff Attorney John Bergmayer. The Senate hearing will also include Georgetown University Center for Business and Public Policy Project Director Larry Downes, Writers Guild of America, West President Christopher Keyser and Free Press Policy Director Matt Wood.

TechNet lauded the election of Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., as Republican House Majority Leader Thursday, replacing Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va. McCarthy has served as whip. “Few members of Congress have as deep an understanding and appreciation for the economic impact and social change created by technology as Leader McCarthy,” CEO Linda Moore said in a statement, citing his “longstanding relationships inside the technology community.” His Federal Election Commission records also show significant donations from telecom and media players such as AT&T, Comcast, CEA, NAB, NCTA, USTelecom, Verizon and Viacom. Republicans also selected Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., as the next whip, replacing McCarthy. Scalise is a member of the Communications Subcommittee and is actively focused on video issues, urging overhaul of old rules and criticizing parts of the current retransmission consent regime. Scalise was one of the most vocal voices on the subcommittee this year in trying to convince his colleagues to overhaul video market rules as part of Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act reauthorization. Capitol Hill staffers have suggested in recent days that Scalise’s rise to GOP leadership would be good for the House Commerce Committee overall, potentially giving its issues greater prominence and attention. The Communications Subcommittee will have to advance a STELA bill as well as, potentially, within the coming years, an overhaul of the Communications Act, as committee leaders have said they intend to do.

Privacy advocates outlined several concerns and recommendations about how the Senate should modify the House-passed version of the USA Freedom Act (HR-3361), in a letter sent to Senate leaders Wednesday. The groups “urge Congress to avoid any form of mandatory data retention regime, which would force U.S. telecom companies to retain and make available to the government data on their customers that they would not otherwise maintain,” said the letter (http://bit.ly/1lC70zX), signed by the American Civil Liberties Union, Center for Democracy & Technology, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Free Press, New America Foundation’s Open Technology Institute, Reddit and TechFreedom, among others. “Any such mandate, in addition to creating unnecessary economic burdens and data security risks, would represent an unacceptable threat to privacy and civil liberties and would face the strongest possible opposition from our community as well as the opposition of the Internet and telecommunications industries.” They will oppose the USA Freedom Act if it does not “definitively” end bulk collection of metadata, focusing on what many say is an overly broad definition of “specific selection term,” they said. The legislation should also have stronger transparency reporting provisions and make the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court more accountable, they said.

Robert McDowell, a former Republican FCC commissioner, plans to tell Congress Friday why FCC net neutrality rules are not necessary. “Nothing is broken that needs fixing,” McDowell says of the Internet access market in his written testimony for a hearing the House Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee is holding at 9 a.m. in 2141 Rayburn. McDowell, now a visiting fellow at the Hudson Institute, voted against net neutrality rules while at the agency. The agency is currently engaged in a rulemaking with the goal of creating new rules. “In sum, the term ‘net neutrality’ seems to morph almost daily, but ultimately all of the arguments for it translate into ‘please regulate my rival ... but not me!’ in order for the politically-favored to gain a competitive advantage through regulatory arbitrage,” McDowell plans to say, warning of a potential “regulatory Leviathan” that would emerge from the regulation. McDowell’s testimony points to U.S. antitrust laws as protecting consumers and given those laws apply to the Internet, they avoid the question the FCC faces over how to classify broadband. Many net neutrality proponents have requested the agency reclassify broadband as a Telecom Act Title II telecom service, believing stronger rules would be possible in that case. McDowell plans to also point to Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act as a relevant piece of law reducing the need for FCC rules. His remarks slam Title II of the Communications Act as “particularly powerful, prescriptive and far-reaching” and warn that net neutrality rules would spur other countries to regulate the Internet in troubling ways. Other witnesses for the hearing include FTC Commissioner Joshua Wright and Columbia Law School professor Tim Wu, a scholar on net neutrality issues who reputedly coined the phrase. The Telecommunications Industry Association sent subcommittee leaders a letter ahead of the hearing warning against Title II reclassification. “The question of whether or not to impose utility-style regulation on Internet Service Providers has previously been thoroughly considered -- and rejected by the FCC,” TIA President Grant Seiffert said (http://bit.ly/TbnCCj). “The Internet has flourished due to the U.S.’s long standing light touch regulatory approach."

The Senate Judiciary Committee postponed consideration of the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act reauthorization bill (S-2454), as expected (CD June 19 p15). Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and ranking member Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, introduced a two-page clean reauthorization bill earlier this month. It was on the Judiciary agenda for its executive business meeting Thursday. Consideration of STELA “is going to be held over,” Leahy said at the meeting’s outset. In that committee, any member can delay consideration of new business by a week. “At our next meeting, that bill will be up for a vote,” Leahy said. “I can safely say both on behalf of Senator Grassley and myself, that’s something we hope to move quickly through the Senate.” Later that day, Judiciary announced an executive business meeting for Thursday at 9:30 a.m. in 226 Dirksen. No agenda was released, but a Judiciary aide confirmed to us that STELA is expected to be on it. In his written statement for the session (http://1.usa.gov/1lEMgWM), Leahy had pointed to the importance of swiftly moving what he called “a bipartisan, non-controversial STELA reauthorization” through the Senate. Lobbyists and observers still await STELA bills from the Senate Commerce Committee and House Judiciary Committee. The House Commerce Committee advanced a bill earlier this year.

The GAO recommended that the Agriculture Department include stimulus-funded Broadband Initiatives Program results achieved as compared with updated subscribership goals in its yearly performance plan and report, outlined in a 32-page GAO report released Tuesday (http://1.usa.gov/UMT5ME). GAO noted that as of March 31, 42 of 297 of these projects were killed, with Rural Utilities Service officials saying “these projects were turned down by the awardee or terminated by RUS for a variety of reasons, such as awardee financial difficulties or inability to meet requirements,” according to GAO. “Consequently, in a BIP status report as of March 31, 2014, RUS updated its subscribership estimate goal to show that 728,733 subscribers were expected to receive new or improved broadband access as a result of BIP funding.” The Agriculture Department agrees with the GAO recommendation “and will institute procedures to fully address it,” GAO said. The report also noted other struggles, such as how “reduced staffing and travel funding levels during BIP’s implementation will challenge RUS to complete inspections given the scope of the program, including 216 ongoing infrastructure projects to be completed by the June 2015 deadline.”

Industry groups, technology companies, civil liberties advocates and libertarian-leaning groups on Wednesday lauded the Email Privacy Act for reaching 218 co-sponsors, which gives it majority House support. HR-1852 would amend the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) to require a warrant to access all remotely stored electronic content. It’s a “significant milestone,” said Google Senior Privacy Policy Counsel David Lieber in a blog post (http://bit.ly/1oGb0le). Software and Information Industry Association Senior Director-Public Policy David LeDuc noted in a blog post that a “majority of the majority” supports the bill, with 136 Republicans backing it (http://bit.ly/1qdskvh). “This stands out as a bipartisan priority to level the playing field for protection of electronic communications,” LeDuc said. The bill’s original sponsors -- Reps. Jared Polis, D-Colo., and Kevin Yoder, R-Kan. -- have said they would like to skip any committee markup and pass the clean bill under suspension, which requires a two-thirds majority. “This legislation is critical to Americans’ Fourth Amendment rights,” said Katie McAuliffe, executive director of Digital Liberty for Americans for Tax Reform, a tax reduction advocate group that is a member of Digital 4th, a coalition of civil liberties and conservative groups. Getting majority sponsorship means “Americans’ electronic communications can be protected from unwarranted government intrusion,” said Chris Calabrese, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, which also belongs to the Digital 4th. Amending ECPA is a “top priority” for the Direct Marketing Association, said DMA Vice President-Government Affairs Rachel Thomas in a Wednesday blog post (http://bit.ly/1yj5jf5). “The consequence of this outdated provision in an important law has been to strip Internet users of basic rights.” Linda Moore, CEO of senior tech executive network TechNet, said in a statement that “ECPA is an obsolete piece of legislation that must be brought into the 21st century.” Google’s Lieber said ECPA makes outdated distinctions based on age of email. “An email may receive more robust privacy protections under ECPA depending on how old it is, whether it has been opened, and where it is stored -- while users attach no importance to these distinctions,” he said. “The Department of Justice itself has acknowledged that there is no principled reason for this rule.”