RSN Fundraising Banner
California Assembly Approves 'Gold Standard' Net Neutrality Bill
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=49043"><span class="small">Roger Cheng, CNET</span></a>   
Monday, 03 September 2018 08:35

Cheng writes: "The bill offers the strongest protections on net neutrality yet and sends a message to the rest of the country."

California State Sen. Scott Wiener (right) talks to Sen. Ed Hernandez. (photo: Scott Wiener)
California State Sen. Scott Wiener (right) talks to Sen. Ed Hernandez. (photo: Scott Wiener)

California Assembly Approves 'Gold Standard' Net Neutrality Bill

By Roger Cheng, CNET

03 September 18

The bill offers the strongest protections on net neutrality yet and sends a message to the rest of the country.

alifornia is taking the lead when it comes to saving net neutrality.

The California State Senate voted Friday to approve a bill that offers the nation's strongest protections for net neutrality. The bill, which passed the State Assembly on Thursday, now heads to Gov. Jerry Brown's desk. He's expected to sign it into law.

California is one of the states looking to enact its own rules governing an open internet, after the Federal Communications Commission, under Chairman Ajit Pai, rolled back the Obama-era net neutrality rules in June. But California's size and influence means its law could have ripple effects elsewhere.

States like Washington have pushed through net neutrality laws, while others are considering doing so. The California Senate vote comes about a week after the attorneys general of 22 states and the District of Columbia filed their brief to a US Appeals Court to reverse the FCC's move. Companies like Firefox's Mozilla and trade groups also filed their arguments. Any state rules on net neutrality will likely face legal challenges from the FCC, which in its repeal prohibited states from passing their own regulations about an open internet.

Net neutrality, the principle that all internet traffic should be treated fairly, has been one of the hottest topics of debate over the last several years. Consumers, tech companies and Democrats have pushed for stricter regulations prohibiting the prioritization of traffic, which resulted in the Obama-era rules put in place by the previous FCC. But the Trump-era FCC has agreed with the internet service providers and Republicans who fear the regulations are too onerous and hurt capital investment.

California's Senate Bill 822 had a more difficult time in the Assembly than it did in the Senate. The bill was initially hailed as the "gold standard" of net neutrality regulation because it went beyond even the Obama-era rules, but in late June a California Assembly committee gutted the bill, which was introduced by Sen. Scott Wiener from San Francisco. At the time, Wiener said the amendments made it "a fake net neutrality bill." It was a surprise the bill had such a tough time, given that many of the legislators are Democrats.

It wasn't until there was an uproar against Democratic Assemblyman Miguel Santiago, who serves as chair of the committee, that the bill was reworked into something closer to the original. The committee last week approved the bill after another round of debates.

Going beyond the FCC order, the bill includes language banning a practice called zero rating, which lets a carrier offer its customers services that don't pump up their data usage. The bill also enforces net neutrality principles at so-called interconnection points, where traffic from companies like Netflix flows onto broadband networks to be delivered to consumers.

Santiago stood before the Assembly to endorse the bill.

"We have an opportunity in California to lead the nation by voting for the bill," Santiago said Thursday.

Internet service providers such as Comcast and AT&T, as well as wireless carriers such as Verizon, T-Mobile and Sprint opposed the legislation, arguing that zero rating actually benefits consumers because it gives them a break on their phone bill, and that the interconnection aspect would hurt business.

The Assembly vote on SB 822 came after two days of voting on various proposals. But the debate over net neutrality drew more Assembly members to weigh in with heated arguments than any other bill at that point. A number of Republicans, including Matthew Harper of Huntington Beach and Jay Obernolte of Big Bear Lake, also spoke out against the bill. They criticized the proposed ban on zero rating and questioned whether California should be the one passing its own law.

Melissa Melendez, a Republican from Lake Elsinore City, called out the arrogance of the Assembly for even weighing in on a national issue.

The fight over this bill intensified to the point where some senior citizens received robocalls spreading false information about the proposed law. The carriers have denied any participation.

The FCC faces a lawsuit over its move to repeal the Obama-era rules. your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

+6 # BetaTheta 2018-09-03 10:28
Fortunately, California is big enough to cause headaches for big Net companies trying to finesse compliance with conflicting state and federal rules, as it does with things like environmental regs.

When it gets to the Supreme Court, all these self-proclaimed "originalists" will have to come out of the closet on the question of "states' rights." As did the Court in 2000's Bush v. Gore.
+6 # Robbee 2018-09-03 11:12
C A L I F O R N I A - R O C K S !