The House Commerce Committee approved three communications bills by voice vote Wednesday during a markup session: the Anti-Spoofing Act of 2013 (HR-3670), the E-LABEL (Enhance Labeling, Accessing, and Branding of Electronic Licenses) Act (HR-5161) and the Kelsey Smith Act (HR-1575). Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, introduced an amendment in the nature of a substitute (http://1.usa.gov/1ldL6OU) to the Anti-Spoofing Act, as he has previously said he would, to address some stakeholder concerns about the language, and it was approved. Communications Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore., successfully tweaked (http://1.usa.gov/1obNjdG) the Kelsey Smith Act to address some possible privacy concerns. Committee ranking member Henry Waxman, D-Calif., backed the changes but reiterated the concerns he aired during opening statements, saying the committee process could have been better. Sprint applauded the lawmakers for advancing the Kelsey Smith Act. “We support Congressional efforts to establish a national framework that will enable law enforcement and wireless carriers to better assist families to obtain access to GPS information promptly in times of crisis,” Sprint Vice President-Government Affairs Bill Barloon said in a statement. The American Civil Liberties Union “believes that the Kelsey Smith bill needs to be strengthened ... so that it has a strong definition of emergency and people have a remedy when their location information is revealed illegally,” ACLU Legislative Counsel Chris Calabrese said. “We have not yet taken a final position on the bill.” The ACLU sent Commerce leaders a letter Tuesday outlining “continuing concern” with the amended bill. “The more significant problem is that the legislation as drafted does not create any penalty if the court finds a violation of the law,” ACLU said in the letter. “There is no penalty for police misconduct, nor is there any remedy allowing a criminal or civil defendant to suppress evidence gathered from this illegal data collection. The result is that a defendant could be harmed by clearly illegal conduct, but have no remedy -- a gross injustice and at odds with criminal procedural remedies in other contexts."

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., backs net neutrality rules that ban “priority arrangements that harm consumers,” he told Demand Progress Executive Director David Segal in a letter dated Monday. Segal asked Reid if he would tell the FCC “to reclassify Internet service providers as common carriers under Title II of the Communications Act of 1934,” as Reid recounted. “Let me assure you that I will lead the fight to protect any Open Internet Rules promulgated by the FCC against the inevitable Republican attack against such rules.” Reid referred to himself as a strong backer of such rules since 2006. Reid’s letter “takes away a crucial talking point that some folks have been saying that the Senate won’t defend Title II reclassification,” Nathan White, who is registered as the primary lobbyist for Demand Progress, told us, giving cover for FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler “to do the right thing. Secondly, Senator Reid writes that no matter what, there will be a fight over this in Congress. That removes another crucial talking point that [Communications Act Section] 706 is somehow the politically easy way out.” Marvin Ammori, a New America Foundation fellow and longtime net neutrality advocate, dubbed this letter a “game changer” and said Title II reclassification “is now politically feasible,” writing in a blog post (http://bit.ly/1s2TerC). Wheeler “has few reasons left for inaction,” White remarked. Segal told us Reid’s letter speaks to the different possible legal authorities the FCC could use to reinstate net neutrality rules, despite its lack of explicit references to such authorities. “This letter is meant to make it clear that Reid would back Title II if that’s where the FCC goes,” Segal said, saying the letter also casts doubt on the notion that basing rules on Section 706 is “politically easy.” The merits of the situation point to Title II reclassification, Segal said.

Rural electric cooperatives excel at providing broadband access and need funding, Robert Hance, CEO of Midwest Energy Cooperative, testifying on behalf the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, told House lawmakers Tuesday. The FCC must be “inclusive” with its Connect America Fund money, Hance said during a House Agriculture Subcommittee on Livestock, Rural Development and Credit, telling Congress that rural electric cooperatives “need your support to compete for the billions of dollars available to provide broadband in high cost areas.” The FCC is still struggling when it comes to providing USF for rate-of-return companies, USTelecom Vice President-Policy David Cohen testified, praising the agency’s retreat from quantile regression analysis and urging “serious consideration” of the proposal put forth by the rural telecom industry. Rural Utilities Service (RUS) Administrator John Padalino touted the government’s efforts to finance rural telecom and the relevance of RUS in the 21st century. “While the focus of this hearing is on the deployment of broadband through Rural Utilit[ies] Service programs, these programs are not operated in a vacuum,” Subcommittee Chairman Rick Crawford, R-Ark., said in his opening statement. “It will be helpful to review those changes in the recent Farm Bill in light of the FCC’s changes to how rural telecommunication companies receive assistance. The efforts by the FCC to reform the USF have a direct impact on smaller rate-of-return carriers who both rely on USF support to provide service, and RUS loans to expand their coverage areas.” Officials representing CTIA and NTCA also testified (CD July 29 p12).

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., introduced Tuesday his latest version of the USA Freedom Act (http://1.usa.gov/1powtMR), the surveillance overhaul bill he originally introduced last fall. The House approved a watered-down version earlier this year, and Leahy’s new version attempts to add back teeth, he said. The bill “ensures that the ban on bulk collection is effective,” said Leahy, who heads the Judiciary Committee, in a statement of introduction. “It ensures that the government cannot rely on Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act, the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act] pen register and trap and trace device statute, or the national security letter statutes to engage in the indiscriminate collection of Americans’ private records.” The bill has 13 co-sponsors from both parties and backing from top privacy advocates and technology companies, many of which had opposed the final House version. Privacy advocates say that more overhaul must follow this bill, a sentiment Leahy also conveyed in introducing the compromise legislation. “Given the need to act quickly, I am willing to forego regular order and take this bill directly to the Senate Floor,” Leahy said. Sens. Al Franken, D-Minn., and Dean Heller, R-Nev., applauded Leahy for including transparency provisions they had authored. Sens. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and Mark Udall, D-Colo., want the bill to go further and address “backdoor” and warrantless searches, they said.

Lawmakers must look past the current spectrum auctions when considering spectrum policy, said Darren Achord, a senior legislative assistant leading telecom policy for Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla. Achord spoke Tuesday at a briefing hosted by the Congressional Hispanic Leadership Institute at the Capitol. This forward-looking need is a challenge, “because so much focus is on the here and now,” he said, calling on government to use spectrum as efficiently and effectively as possible. There’s need for more spectrum sharing and scrutiny of barriers to wireless infrastructure deployment, he said. Rubio has highlighted spectrum policy as a priority this year and introduced two pieces of legislation on the topic. “On the member level, it’s just the education about how important this is,” Achord added, lamenting people falling asleep at the sound of gigahertz. “It’s all about after those auctions,” Achord said. “We've got to continue to be looking forward. … Can we make more spectrum available? Where do we need to be doing that?”

A top House Democrat attacked the way the House Commerce Committee is conducting its business. The Commerce Committee met Tuesday afternoon for the start of a markup session including the Anti-Spoofing Act of 2013 (HR-3670), the E-LABEL (Enhance Labeling, Accessing and Branding of Electronic Licenses) Act (HR-5161) and the Kelsey Smith Act (HR-1575). Ranking member Henry Waxman, D-Calif., attacked the committee leadership, turning the title of a recent Republican news release on its head. “The title of the release left an impression on me,” Waxman said during his opening statement, referring to the Republican release (http://1.usa.gov/1pc5YXT) ripping into what it judged a broken FCC process and something smelling rotten on the eighth floor of the agency’s headquarters. “Well, by their standards, something is broken in our committee today.” He criticized the way the committee had bypassed a hearing process or subcommittee markup for many of the measures under consideration. Waxman backs the Anti-Spoofing Act and E-LABEL Act, calling those common-sense measures, but the Kelsey Smith Act is complicated and has faced no subcommittee or hearing debate. Waxman pointed to such issues as “consumer privacy regarding call location data.” But Waxman noted “it is not perfect but progress has been made.” In his opening statement, Chairman Fred Upton, R-Mich., said that all three telecom bills are bipartisan. Communications Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore., called the Kelsey Smith Act, which would compel carriers to share call location data with law enforcement when necessary, “the most meaningful” of the three telecom measures. “Versions of this legislation have been passed in 14 states.” Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., said she’s glad the drafters of the Kelsey Smith Act took some of her privacy concerns into consideration with the version for the markup. She aligns herself with Waxman’s committee process concerns, she said. Commerce will resume the markup session Wednesday at 10 a.m. in 2123 Rayburn.

Data caps may have the same “damaging effect" as Internet traffic discrimination that net neutrality debates focus on, House Communications Subcommittee ranking member Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., said Tuesday during a briefing at the Capitol. She emphasized the danger of certain corporate relationships that can affect such usage-based pricing arrangements, where streaming from a company like Netflix might count against an ISP’s data cap but streaming from an affiliate of that ISP would not: “That’s where the thorn in the ointment is,” Eshoo said. She requested the Government Accountability Office look into these issues last year, and the GAO presented its preliminary findings Tuesday, with the final report to come in November. Mark Goldstein, head of the GAO’s physical infrastructure division, noted that the four major wireless providers have all applied usage-based pricing (UBP) to some degree and many wireline providers “slowly and surely” are as well. But consumers are largely confused, both about their plans and about how much data they consume, Goldstein said. Consumers seemed to have much more negative reactions to wireline UBP than wireless, he added. GAO interviewed the top 13 wireline providers and the four major wireless ISPs as well as held eight focus groups with consumers who subscribe to wireless and wireline broadband, according to his presentation. They spoke with 77 consumers total in Baltimore, Des Moines, Las Vegas and New York. “Consumers are left wondering if they're going to have to foot the bill,” concerns that are all the more relevant “in the midst of what is now a full-blown net neutrality debate,” Eshoo said. All consumers want a “fair price,” she added. An Eshoo aide told us last week Eshoo plans to submit these initial GAO findings to the FCC as part of its net neutrality proceeding.

Senior officials from the FCC and FTC are scheduled to testify on wireless cramming before Congress this week. The witnesses for Wednesday’s Senate Commerce Committee hearing are, as the committee announced Monday, CTIA General Counsel Michael Altschul, FCC Enforcement Bureau Acting Chief Travis LeBlanc, FTC Commissioner Terrell McSweeny and Vermont Attorney General William Sorrell. The hearing will be at 2:30 p.m. in 253 Russell.

Rep. Mike Michaud, D-Maine, wants to help resolve the union contract struggles that FairPoint Communications faces in Maine. “I am encouraging both sides to stay at the bargaining table and to negotiate in good faith on a new contract that will protect workers and help the company to grow and be successful,” he said in a statement last week, citing a recent meeting he had with FairPoint workers and that his staff had with FairPoint. Negotiations are underway between FairPoint and both the Communications Workers of America and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, representing 2,000 FairPoint workers, 750 of them in Maine, Michaud said. “The success of any company -- or the state as a whole for that matter -- is tied to its workforce,” he said. “It’s my hope that a fair agreement can be reached that will protect good jobs in Maine and help Fairpoint to provide top quality service to its customers.” Shenna Bellows, the Democratic challenger for one of Maine’s U.S. Senate seats, backs the Maine FairPoint workers, she said in a news release earlier this month (http://bit.ly/X547Oc). The FairPoint labor contract expires Aug. 2.

There’s a deficit of information about broadcaster sharing agreements, the Government Accountability Office said in a 41-page report released Monday (http://1.usa.gov/1nOn1nv). It argued that the FCC “should determine whether it needs to collect additional data to understand the prevalence and context of broadcast agreements and whether broadcaster agreements affect its media policy goals of competition, localism, and diversity,” which the FCC accepted and has begun acting on, including by “proposing disclosure of sharing agreements.” GAO had reviewed, from July 2013 to last month, relevant FCC dockets and interviewed industry stakeholders as well as FCC officials, it told Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., who requested the report. “Consumer groups raised concerns that agreements in which stations share news resources can lead to duplicative content in local newscasts,” GAO said. “Station owners counter that the agreements are needed to allow some stations to continue providing news and allow other stations that previously did not provide news to begin doing so.” It provided details on the prevalence of such sharing agreements and in which markets they are more prominent.