ANTITRUST AND LINE SHARING SEEN RETURNING TO HR-1542 DEBATE
Opponents of Tauzin-Dingell data deregulation bill confirmed they would introduce line-sharing and telecom antitrust amendments if and when legislation reached House floor later this month. Bill (HR-1542) by House Commerce Committee Chmn. Tauzin (R-La.) and ranking minority member Dingell (D-Mich.) would ensure Bells could provide Internet backbone and high-speed Internet service across their respective interLATA boundaries without FCC approval. But House critics came out Thurs. in support of CLEC lobbying effort on Capitol Hill, endorsing competitive carriers’ claims HR-1542 would stifle rather than increase capital investment in advanced communications infrastructure.
Proponents of Tauzin-Dingell have said bill is necessary to spur investment in high-speed Internet systems across U.S. Since incumbents are otherwise required to sell network access to competitors at wholesale prices, often below cost, they said such massive investments of capital won’t pay off without regulatory incentive. House Telecom Subcommittee ranking minority member Markey (D-Mass.) rejected that argument in CLEC rally in Rayburn Bldg. lobby, saying Bells “invented DSL 10 years before they deployed it.” He told CLEC executives at event that “because of you, there have been tens of billions of dollars in broadband deployment,” much of it stemming from CLEC initiatives and incumbent projects started in response.
Rep. Luther (D-Minn.) said “line sharing is absolutely critical if we're going to have competition in this industry.” He said he intended to address that issue again so CLECs would continue to have access to incumbents’ networks as spelled out in the Telecom Act. Luther and Rep. Wilson (R-N.M.) had introduced line-sharing amendment in last year’s Commerce Committee markup of Tauzin-Dingell but measure stalled. Although HR-1542 contains line-sharing language, it has been criticized as Band-Aid. Tauzin-Dingell proponents say issues raised by Luther-Wilson may be considered as long as they don’t eviscerate bill.
Despite hopes of Luther and CLEC supporters, it’s still up to Rules Committee to determine which amendments will be considered on House floor. Although observers have speculated (CD Jan 31 p1) Rules Committee will allow 4-5 amendments, including some that could increase or preserve CLEC access to unbundled network elements (UNEs), Rules Committee Chmn. Dreier (R-Cal.) and his staff have remained tight-lipped on which way panel is leaning, if at all. Luther aide said in recent months (CD Nov 29 p1) Rules had been in continuing consultative process that could determine whether Luther-Wilson would be revived.
Amendment to Tauzin-Dingell that would expand Dept. of Justice (DoJ) oversight of Sec. 271 applications also could be on horizon, Rep. Cannon (R-Utah) told us at CLEC event. He and Judiciary Committee ranking minority member Conyers (D-Mich.) had introduced legislation last year that would increase DoJ’s authority in reviewing Bell company long distance applications and investigations into alleged violations of Telecom Act. Chmn. Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) introduced amended version of Cannon-Conyers that would: (1) Require Bells to file Sec. 271 applications with DoJ before offering Internet services across their interLATA boundaries. (2) Enable Justice to “issue rules” and “make recommendations” on its decision to reject or approve such applications. (3) Overturn 7th U.S. Appeals Court, Chicago, decision Goldwasser v. Ameritech, which declared antitrust law subordinate to Telecom Act in resolution of telecom market disputes.
Sensenbrenner’s version of Cannon-Conyers dropped language that would allow DoJ to re-issue rules “if the Bells are using or are likely to use their monopoly power to engage in exclusionary or anticompetitive conduct.” Committee referred Sensenbrenner amendment, but shot down Cannon- Conyers 15-19. Although Cannon wouldn’t elaborate on what antitrust language would be drafted for consideration, he told us to “expect a Goldwasser fix… I think we'll see a Goldwasser fix when [HR-1542] comes the floor.”
Sources have said Sensenbrenner has backed off his push to include Goldwasser-related provision in amended version of Tauzin-Dingell that will reach House floor. Sensenbrenner purportedly agreed (CD Dec 14 p1) to relinquish data deregulation issue to Tauzin in exchange for control of database protection. Cannon indicated that although 2 issues had been discussed jointly -- as have others -- it was unlikely jurisdictional deal had been reached that would exclude consideration of greater DoJ role in telecom disputes.