[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 108 (Thursday, August 1, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7931-S7935]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. McCain:
  S. 2863. A bill to provide for deregulation of consumer broadband 
services; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I introduce the Consumer Broadband 
Deregulation Act of 2002. This legislation takes a comprehensive, 
deregulatory, but measured approach to providing more Americans with 
more broadband choices. By ensuring that the market, not government, 
regulates the deployment of broadband services, the legislation will 
promote investment and innovation in broadband facilities--and 
consumers will benefit.
  The bill would create a new title in the Communications Act of 1934 
that would ensure that residential broadband services exist in a 
minimally regulated environment. The new section of the Act would also 
make certain that providers of broadband services are treated in a 
similar fashion without regard to the particular mode of providing 
service. The bill includes provisions that would take the following 
actions:

       Deregulate the retail provision of residential broadband 
     services; dictate a hands-off approach to the deployment of 
     new facilities by telephone companies while maintaining 
     competitors' access to legacy systems; resist government-
     mandated open access while providing a safety net to ensure 
     consumers enjoy a competitive broadband services market; 
     ensure that local and state barriers to broadband deployment 
     are removed; facilitate deployment of broadband services to 
     rural and unserved communities by creating an information 
     clearing house in the federal government; maximize wireless 
     technology as a platform for broadband services; ensure 
     access to broadband services by people with disabilities; 
     enhance the enforcement tools

[[Page S7932]]

     available to the FCC; and put the federal government in the 
     role of stimulator, rather than regulatory, of broadband 
     services.

  In 1996, Congress passed the first major overhaul of 
telecommunications policy in 62 years. Supporters of the 
Telecommunications Act argued that it would create increased 
competition, provide consumers with a variety of new and innovative 
services at lower prices, and reduce the need for regulation. My 
principal objection to the Act was that it fundamentally regulated, not 
deregulated, the telecommunications industry and would lead inevitably 
to prolonged litigation. It has been six years since the passage of the 
Act, but consumers have yet to benefit. Competition denied by excessive 
regulation is costly to consumers.
  The latest legislative debate in the communications industry has 
focused on the availability of high-speed Internet access services, 
often called ``broadband.'' Indeed, Federal Communications Commission 
Chairman, Michael Powell, has called broadband, ``the central 
communications policy objective in America.''
  There is stark disagreement about the state of affairs of broadband 
services in the United States. Depending on who is speaking, there is a 
supply problem, a demand problem, a combination of the two, or no 
problem at all. All parties agree, however, that Americans and our 
national economy will benefit greatly from the widespread use of 
broadband services. Accelerated broadband deployment reportedly could 
benefit our nation's economy by hundreds of billions of dollars.
  With such tremendous opportunity comes no shortage of ``solutions.'' 
Many want a national industrial policy to drive broadband deployment--
they suggest multi-billion dollar central planning efforts aimed to 
deliver services to consumers regardless of whether those consumers 
want or need such services. Others have focused on narrow issues 
affecting only a subset of all providers of broadband services.
  This legislation takes a different approach. It takes a comprehensive 
look at the proper role of the government with respect to these new 
services. It reduces government interference with market forces that 
lead to consumer welfare, and looks for ways that government can 
facilitate, not dictate or control, the development of broadband 
technologies.
  Mr. President, I am a firm believe in free market principles. In 
1995, I introduced a series of amendments during the floor debate on 
the Telecommunications Act that would have made the bill truly 
deregulatory. As I said at the time, I believe that ``[i]n free 
markets, less government usually means more innovation, more 
entrepreneurial opportunities, more competition, and more benefits to 
consumers.'' Likewise, in 1998, I introduced the Telecommunications 
Competition Act that would have allowed competition to flourish and 
brought true deregulation to the telecommunications market. In 1999, I 
introduced the Internet Regulatory Freedom Act that would have 
eliminated certain regulation of telephone companies' deployment of 
broadband facilities. And in 1999 and 2000, I was a leading advocate in 
the Senate for the Internet Tax Freedom Act ensuring a moratorium on 
taxation of the Internet.
  I stand by the legislation and amendments I previously introduced and 
believe that they represented the right approach at the right time. In 
fact, if I had it my way, I would throw out the 1996 Act and start from 
scratch. I am mindful, however, that broadband has been an issue that 
has polarized policymakers to the point of legislative paralysis. Now 
is the time for a measured approach that focuses on achieving what can 
be done to improve the deployment of services to all consumers. I 
believe that this legislation is such an approach.
  The bill has multiple components designed to address all aspects of 
broadband deployment and usage, and also provides adequate safety nets 
in the event that there proves to be a market failure that is harmful 
to consumers.
  Broadband services can be provided over multiple platforms including 
telephone, cable, wireless, satellite, and perhaps one day soon, power 
lines, Each of these platforms is regulated differently based on the 
nature of the service the platform was originally designed to provide. 
This legislation would move us closer to a harmonization of regulatory 
ancestry of a particular platform.
  First, the bill makes clear that the retail provision of high-speed 
Internet service remains unregulated. The Internet's tremendous growth 
is a testament to the exercise of regulatory restraint.
  Some have suggested a need for government regulation of consumer 
broadband service quality. They allege that service deficiencies 
inhibit the development of these new offerings. But we must remember 
that these are new services, and new services will have problems. This 
legislation allows for these services to mature. If upon maturity, the 
FCC determines that there is a need to protect consumers from service 
quality shortcomings related to the technical provision of service. 
Then the states can enforce uniform requirements. This provides a 
measured approach to service quality--a safety net without a 
presumption of regulation.
  Next, we must clarify that new services offered by varied providers, 
regardless of mode, will not be subject to the micromanagement of 
government regulation. Recognizing that upgrading networks requires 
substantial investment not free of risk, this bill begins this process 
by relaxing the obligations on telephone companies that invest in 
facilities that will bring better broadband services to more consumers. 
Nothing in this legislation, however, will undermine competitors' 
efforts to provide services using the telephone companies' legacy 
facilities. This approach strikes a balance between the interests of 
those who have invested capital on the promise of government-managed 
competition and those who will invest in the future of broadband 
facilities on the promise of government restraint and market-driven 
competition.
  The bill also grapples with the government-managed wholesale market 
for consumer broadband services--the so-called ``open access'' debate. 
Mr. President, there is perhaps no more difficult issue addressed in 
this bill.
  The Internet has thrived because it is an open platform. The presence 
of numerous ISPs in the narrowband market certainly contributed to the 
vitality of this open network, particularly at the inception of the 
Internet. Those providers have depended on access to customers 
guaranteed by FCC rules. As a result, many have suggested the need for 
government-mandated access to customers served over broadband 
connections. They raise significant concerns about carriers becoming 
screeners of content, and anti-competitive threats to web site 
operators if consumers do not have a choice of ISP or are limited in 
their ability to access particular web sites.

  However tempting it may be to believe that government mandates will 
produce desired policy outcomes, such intervention too often comes at 
the price of market inefficiencies, stifled innovation, and increased 
regulatory costs. Moreover, regulators are often slow to respond to 
dynamic industry changes.
  The bill would rely on market forces to resolve access issues by 
establishing the general rule that the FCC may not impose open access 
requirements on any provider--no matter what platform is used to 
provide the consumer broadband service. Again, the bill takes a 
measured approach by creating a safety net for consumers. Today a 
multitude of ISPs rely on access mandated by the FCC to serve their 
customers. The bill would allow the FCC to continue to enforce these 
obligations during a transition period, but would mandate the sunset of 
such requirements unless the FCC determines their continued enforcement 
is necessary to preserve competition for consumers.
  I firmly believe that market forces will guide the development of a 
wholesale market producing sustainable, not government-managed, 
competition. The bill is sufficiently flexible to ensure that consumers 
are protected, whole sending a clear signal to those parties willing to 
make the significant investment necessary to provide broadband services 
that the government will not lie in wait only to reward their risk-
taking with regulation.
  I note again, however, that this issue raises challenging and complex 
policy questions. We should ensure the continued open nature of the 
Internet. To

[[Page S7933]]

the extent that market forces prove incapable of preventing 
restrictions on consumers' use of the Internet or limitations on 
devices that consumers wish to attach to their Internet connection, we 
may need to consider a different approach. I look forward to continue 
debate on these difficult questions.
  The potential for government interference with market forces is not 
limited to federal regulation. State and local governments are also 
capable of obstructing the deployment of broadband. The bill would 
address this threat by precluding any state or local regulation from 
prohibiting the ability of any entity to provide consumer broadband 
service. It would also prevent localities from transforming their 
legitimate interest in managing their rights of way into an imposition 
of additional, revenue-generating financial burdens on broadband 
deployment.
  Consumer broadband services should be accessible to all people, 
regardless of where they live, what they do, or how much they earn. We 
must be realistic, however, about how quickly this can occur. The bill 
recognizes the important role that government can play as facilitator 
to accelerate universal deployment by using its resources to allow 
communities to share information about successful efforts to attract 
broadband deployment.
  Government can facilitate broadband deployment and use in other ways 
as well. Wireless technologies like Wi-Fi and mesh networks hold 
tremendous promise for the delivery of consumer broadband services. 
Given its role in the management of spectrum, the government can impact 
the use of these technologies. The bill would require the FCC to 
examine the best role for government in fully exploiting wireless 
technologies as a broadband platform for the benefit of consumers.
  Although government should limit its role to those circumstances 
where market failure is demonstrated, Chairman Powell has suggested 
that the Commission must be prepared to better enforce its existing 
rules by increasing the Commission's ability to impose penalties on 
parties that act in a manner that is anticompetitive. This bill would 
given him the tools to do so.
  Some claim that there is a demand ``problem'' with broadband that is 
caused by the dearth of available broadband content. Here, too, 
government can play an important role. Certainly content is one of the 
factors that will drive consumers to subscribe to high-speed Internet 
services. Given the prominent role that the federal government plays in 
the lives of most Americans, it can be a source of substantial 
broadband content. The bill would ensure that the federal government is 
fully exploiting its ability to provide this content.
  Finally, I recognize that many will look at the bill and ask about 
broadband services used by businesses. Why treat those services 
differently? It is a fair question. I have stated previously that most 
of the advantages of the Telecommunications Act have accrued not to the 
average consumer who has seen only higher prices for existing services, 
but to business customers. It is these business customers that many 
competitors have attempted to serve using the facilities of the 
incumbent telephone companies. Moreover, whereas the cable platform is 
the source of robust, facilities-based competition in the consumer 
market, it has not developed to a similar extent in the market for 
business customers. Given these factors, and a desire to take a 
measured approach, I have generally limited the scope of this bill to 
the consumer broadband services market. This focus does not reflect my 
lack of support for a similarly deregulatory approach to the business 
market. Indeed, I strongly encourage Chairman Powell to be aggressive 
in using the tools at his disposal to remove regulations wherever 
appropriate in the business broadband services market.
  Mr. President, technological progress has too often been constrained 
by government policies that seek to control it and dictate its course. 
Such policies have often had the perverse effect of slowing 
technological advancements. The growth of the Internet demonstrates 
what happens when governments choose to learn from the mistakes of the 
past in order to build a better and richer future for our citizens. The 
choice we have made is to adapt our mechanisms for governance to 
facilitate and encourage technological change--to facilitate rather 
than to control--to monitor rather than dominate. This bill continues 
that course.

  I urge my colleagues to join with me in supporting this deregulatory 
legislation to help advance broadband in the United States.
  Mr. President, I ask that the bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2863

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; AMENDMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 
                   1934; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Consumer 
     Broadband Deregulation Act''.
       (b) Amendment of Communications Act of 1934.--Except as 
     otherwise expressly provided, whenever in this Act an 
     amendment or repeal is expressed in terms of an amendment to, 
     or repeal of, a section or other provision, the reference 
     shall be considered to be made to a section or other 
     provision of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 151 et 
     seq.).
       (c) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; amendment of Communications Act of 1934; table of 
              contents.
Sec. 2. Findings.
Sec. 3. Deregulation of consumer broadband services.
Sec. 4. Unbundled access and collocation requirements.
Sec. 5. National clearinghouse for high-speed Internet access.
Sec. 6. Enforcement.
Sec. 7. Spectrum reform study.
Sec. 8. Study on ways to promote broadband through e-government.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

       (a) Findings.--The Congress finds the following:
       (1) All consumer broadband service markets should be open 
     to competition.
       (2) Consumer broadband service can be provided over 
     numerous different platforms.
       (3) All providers of consumer broadband services should be 
     able to provide such services and be subject to harmonized 
     regulation when offering such services.
       (4) Consumer broadband services can enhance the quality of 
     life for Americans and promote economic development, job 
     creation, and international competitiveness.
       (5) Advancements in the nation's Internet infrastructure 
     will enhance the public welfare by helping to speed the 
     delivery of services such as telemedicine, distance learning, 
     remote medical services, and distribution of health 
     information.
       (6) Government regulations that affect high-speed Internet 
     access should promote investment and innovation in all 
     technological platforms.
       (b) Purpose.--It is the purpose of this Act to allow market 
     forces to introduce investment and innovation in consumer 
     broadband services for the benefit of all Americans.

     SEC. 3. DEREGULATION OF CONSUMER BROADBAND SERVICES.

       (a) In General.--The Act is amended--
       (1) by redesignating title VII as title VIII;
       (2) by redesignating sections 701 through 714 as sections 
     801 through 814, respectively;
       (3) by striking ``section 714'' in section 
     309(j)(8)(C)(iii) and inserting ``section 814'';
       (4) by striking ``section 705'' in section 712(b) and 
     inserting ``section 805''; and
       (5) by inserting after title VI the following:

                ``TITLE VII--CONSUMER BROADBAND SERVICES

     ``SEC. 701. RETAIL CONSUMER BROADBAND SERVICE.

       ``(a) Freedom From Regulation.--Except as provided in 
     subsection (c), neither the Commission, nor any State, shall 
     have authority to regulate the rates, charges, terms, or 
     conditions for the retail offering of consumer broadband 
     service.
       ``(b) Other Services and Facilities.--Nothing in this 
     section precludes the Commission, or a State or local 
     government, from regulating the provision of any service 
     other than consumer broadband service, even if that service 
     is provided over the same facilities as are used to provide 
     consumer broadband service.
       ``(c) Service Quality.--
       ``(1) Commission determination required.--The Commission 
     shall initiate a study within 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of the Consumer Broadband Deregulation Act to 
     determine whether State regulation of consumer broadband 
     service quality is appropriate or necessary for the 
     protection of consumers.
       ``(2) Regulations; state enforcement.--If the Commission 
     determines that State regulation of consumer broadband 
     service quality is appropriate or necessary for the 
     protection of consumers, the Commission shall promulgate 
     regulations establishing uniform national guidelines 
     regulating consumer broadband service quality that may be 
     enforced by States. Any regulations promulgated under this 
     paragraph may not take effect before the date that is 2 years 
     after the date of enactment of the Consumer Broadband 
     Deregulation Act.

[[Page S7934]]

       ``(3) Preemption of other state service quality 
     regulation.--
       ``(A) In general.--Unless the Commission promulgates 
     regulations under paragraph (2), no State may regulate the 
     quality of consumer broadband services provided to its 
     citizens or residents.
       ``(B) Limitation.--If the commission promulgates 
     regulations under paragraph (2), no State may regulate the 
     quality of consumer broadband services provided to its 
     citizens or residents except as provided in those 
     regulations.
       ``(4) No inference.--Nothing in this section shall affect a 
     State's ability to enforce consumer protection laws and 
     regulations unrelated to the technical provision of consumer 
     broadband service.

     ``SEC. 702. WHOLESALE CONSUMER BROADBAND SERVICE.

       ``(a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), 
     neither the Commission nor any State or political subdivision 
     thereof shall have authority to require a consumer broadband 
     service provider to afford an Internet service provider 
     access to its facilities or services for the purpose of 
     offering a consumer broadband service.
       ``(b) Exception.--To the extent that any entity is required 
     by the Commission to afford an Internet service provider 
     access to its facilities or services for the purpose of 
     providing consumer broadband service on the date of enactment 
     of the Consumer Broadband Deregulation Act, the Commission 
     may require that entity to continue to afford such access.
       ``(c) Report.--The Commission shall report to the Senate 
     Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the 
     House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce 
     within 2 years after the date of enactment of the Consumer 
     Broadband Deregulation Act on the state of the wholesale 
     market for consumer broadband services and its effect on 
     retail competition for these services.
       ``(d) Sunset Provision.--Subsection (b) shall cease to be 
     effective 5 years after the date of enactment of such Act, 
     unless the Commission finds that the continued exercise of 
     its authority under that subsection is necessary to preserve 
     and protect competition in the provision of consumer 
     broadband services.

     ``SEC. 703. LIMIT ON STATE AND LOCAL AUTHORITY; PUBLIC 
                   RIGHTS-OF-WAY CHARGES.

       ``(a) Removal of Barriers to Entry.--No State or local 
     statute or regulation, or other State or local legal 
     requirement, may prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting 
     the ability of any entity to provide any consumer broadband 
     service.
       ``(b) Cost-based Compensation for Rights-of-Way.--A State 
     or local government may not require compensation from 
     consumer broadband service providers for access to, or use 
     of, public rights-of-way that exceeds the direct and actual 
     costs reasonably allocable to the administration of access 
     to, or use of, public rights-of-way.
       ``(c) Public disclosure.--A State or local government shall 
     disclose to the public, on a timely basis and in an easily 
     understood format, any compensation required from consumer 
     broadband service providers for access to, of use of, public 
     rights-of-way.

     ``SEC. 704. ACCESS BY PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES.

       ``(a) Manufacturers.--A manufacturer of equipment used for 
     consumer broadband services shall ensure that equipment is 
     designed, developed, and fabricated to be accessible to and 
     usable by persons with disabilities, unless the manufacturer 
     demonstrates that taking such steps would result in an undue 
     burden.
       ``(b) Consumer Broadband Service Providers.--A provider of 
     consumer broadband services shall ensure that its services 
     are accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities, 
     unless the provider demonstrates that taking such steps would 
     result in an undue burden.
       ``(c) Compatibility.--Whenever the requirements of 
     subsections (a) and (b) constitute an undue burden, a 
     manufacturer or provider shall ensure that the equipment or 
     service is compatible with existing peripheral devices or 
     specialized customer premises equipment commonly used by 
     persons with disabilities to achieve access, unless the 
     manufacturer or provider demonstrates that taking such steps 
     would result in an undue burden.
       ``(d) Regulations.--Within 18 months after the date of 
     enactment of the Consumer Broadband Deregulation Act, the 
     Commission shall prescribe such regulations as are necessary 
     to implement this section. The regulations shall ensure 
     consistency across multiple service platforms with respect to 
     access by persons with disabilities. The regulations also 
     shall provide that neither broadband services, broadband 
     access services, nor the equipment used for such services may 
     impair or impede the accessibility of information content 
     when accessibility has been incorporated in that content for 
     transmission through broadband services, access services, or 
     equipment.
       ``(e) Definitions.--In this section--
       ``(1) Disability.--The term `disability' has the meaning 
     given to it by section 3(2)(A) of the Americans with 
     Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12102(2)(A)).
       ``(2) Undue burden.--The term `undue burden' means 
     significant difficulty or expense. In determining whether the 
     requirements of this paragraph would result in an undue 
     burden, the factors to be considered include--
       ``(A) the nature and cost of the steps required for the 
     manufacturer or provider;
       ``(B) the impact on the operation of the manufacturer or 
     provider;
       ``(C) the financial resources of the manufacturer or 
     provider; and
       ``(D) the type of operations of the manufacturer or 
     provider.''.

     ``SEC. 705. RELATIONSHIP TO TITLES II, III, AND VI.

       ``If the application of any provision of title II, III, or 
     VI of this Act is inconsistent with any provision of this 
     title, then to the extent the application of both provisions 
     would conflict with or frustrate the application of the 
     provision of this title--
       ``(1) the provision of this title shall apply; and
       ``(2) the inconsistent provision of title II, III, or VI 
     shall not apply.''.
       (b) Consumer Broadband Services Defined.--Section 3 (47 
     U.S.C. 153) is amended by inserting after paragraph (12) the 
     following:
       ``(12A) Consumer broadband services.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `consumer broadband services' 
     means interstate residential high-speed Internet access 
     services.
       ``(B) High-speed.--The Commission shall establish by rule 
     the criterion, in terms of megabits per second, to be used 
     for the purpose of determining whether residential Internet 
     services are high-speed Internet services. In establishing 
     that criterion, the Commission shall consider whether the 
     speed is sufficient to support existing applications and to 
     encourage the development of new applications. The Commission 
     shall revise the criterion as necessary and shall review any 
     criterion established by it no less frequently than each 18 
     months.
       ``(C) Internet access service.--The term `Internet access 
     service' means a service that combines computer processing, 
     information storage, protocol conversion, and routing with 
     telecommunications to enable users to access Internet content 
     and services.''.

     SEC. 4. UNBUNDLED ACCESS AND COLLOCATION REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) Unbundled Access.--Section 251(c)(3) (47 U.S.C. 
     251(c)(3)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(3) Unbundled access.--
       ``(A) In general.--The duty to provide, to any requesting 
     telecommunications carrier for the provision of a 
     telecommunications service, nondiscriminatory access to 
     network elements on an unbundled basis at any technically 
     feasible point on rates, terms, and conditions that are just, 
     reasonable, and nondiscriminatory in accordance with the 
     terms and conditions of the agreement and the requirements of 
     this section and section 252. An incumbent local exchange 
     carrier shall provide such unbundled network elements in a 
     manner that allows requesting carriers to combine such 
     elements in order to provide such telecommunications service.
       ``(B) Exception.--The duty to provide access under 
     subparagraph (A) does not require an incumbent local exchange 
     carrier to provide access to a fiber local loop or fiber 
     feeder subloop to a requesting carrier to enable the 
     requesting carrier to provide a telecommunications service 
     that is an input to a consumer broadband service unless the 
     incumbent local exchange carrier has removed or rendered 
     useless a previously existing cooper loop necessary to 
     provide such services.''.
       (b) Collocation.--Section 251(c)(6) (47 U.S.C. 251(c)(6)) 
     is amended to read as follows:
       ``(6) Collocation.--
       ``(A) In general.--The duty to provide, on rates, terms, 
     and conditions that are just, reasonable, and 
     nondiscriminatory, for physical collocation of equipment 
     necessary for interconnection or access to unbundled network 
     elements at the premises of the local exchange carrier, 
     except that the carrier may provide for virtual collocation 
     if the local exchange carrier demonstrates to the State 
     commission that physical collocation is not practical for 
     technical reasons or because of space limitations.
       ``(B) Exception.--The duty to provide for collocation under 
     subparagraph (A) does not require an incumbent local exchange 
     carrier to provide for collocation in a remote terminal.''.

     SEC. 5. NATIONAL CLEARINGHOUSE FOR HIGH-SPEED INTERNET 
                   ACCESS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Commerce shall establish 
     a national clearinghouse within the Department of Commerce 
     that allows communities throughout the United States, 
     particularly rural communities, to find data and information 
     relating to the deployment of facilities capable of 
     supporting high-speed Internet services.
       (b) Exchange Function.--The Secretary shall solicit and 
     accept data, information, and advice from communities that 
     have succeeded in attracting the deployment of broadband 
     services and infrastructure in order to make that data, 
     information, and advice available to other communities that 
     are seeking to deploy high-speed Internet services.

     SEC. 6. ENFORCEMENT.

       (a) Cease and Desist Authority.--Section 501 of the 
     Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 501) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``Any person'' and inserting ``(a) Fines 
     and Imprisonment.--Any person'';
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(b) Cease and Desist Orders.-- If, after a hearing, the 
     Commission determines that any common carrier or consumer 
     broadband service provider is engaged in an act, matter,

[[Page S7935]]

     or thing prohibited by this Act, or is failing to perform any 
     act, matter, or thing required by this Act, the Commission 
     may order such common carrier or provider to cease or desist 
     from such action or inaction.''.
       (b) Forfeiture Penalties.--Section 503(b) of the 
     Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 503(b)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2)(B)--
       (A) by striking ``exceed $100,000'' and inserting ``exceed 
     $1,000,000''; and
       (B) by striking ``of $1,000,000'' and inserting ``of 
     $10,000,000'';
       (2) in paragraph (2)(C), by striking ``subparagraph (A) or 
     (B)'' and inserting ``subparagraph (A), (B), or (C)'';
       (3) by redesignating subparagraphs (C) and (D) of paragraph 
     (2) as subparagraphs (D) and (E), respectively;
       (4) by inserting after subparagraph (B) of paragraph (2) 
     the following new subparagraph:
       ``(C) If a common carrier or consumer broadband service 
     provider has violated a cease and desist order or has 
     previously been assessed a forfeiture penalty for a violation 
     of a provision of this Act or of any rule, regulation, or 
     order issued by the Commission, and if the Commission or an 
     administrative law judge determines that such common carrier 
     has willfully violated the same provision, rule, regulation, 
     that this repeated violation has caused harm to competition, 
     and that such common carrier or consumer broadband service 
     provider has been assessed a forfeiture penalty under this 
     subsection for such previous violation, the Commission may 
     assess a forfeiture penalty not to exceed $2,000,000 for each 
     violation or each day of continuing violation; except that 
     the amount of such forfeiture penalty shall not exceed 
     $20,000,000.''; and
       (5) in paragraph (6)(B), by striking ``1 year'' and 
     inserting ``2 years''.

     SEC. 7. WIRELESS BROADBAND STUDY.

       (a) In General.--The Federal Communications Commission 
     shall conduct a study--
       (1) on wireless technology to determine the appropriate 
     role of the Federal government in facilitating greater 
     consumer access to consumer broadband services using evolving 
     advanced technology; and
       (2) what, if any, action by the Federal government is 
     needed to increase the deployment of new wireless technology 
     to facilitate high-speed Internet access.
       (b) Focus.--In conducting the study, the Commission shall 
     focus on consumer broadband services utilizing wireless 
     technology.
       (c) Consideration of Wireless Industry Views.--In 
     conducting the study, the Commission shall consider the views 
     of, among other interested parties, representatives of the 
     telecommunications industry (as defined in section 714(k)(3) 
     of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 614(k)(3)) 
     involved in wireless communications.
       (d) Report.--
       (1) In general.--The Commission shall transmit a report, 
     containing its findings, conclusions, and recommendations 
     from the study to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, 
     and Transportation and the House of Representatives Committee 
     on Energy and Commerce within 18 months after the date of 
     enactment of this Act.
       (2) Report to be available to public.--The Commission shall 
     make its report available to the public.

     SEC. 8. STUDY ON WAYS TO PROMOTE BROADBAND THROUGH E-
                   GOVERNMENT.

       The Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the 
     Director of the Office of Management and Budget, shall 
     transmit a report to the Senate Committee on Commerce, 
     Science, and Transportation and the House of Representatives 
     Committee on Energy and Commerce within 6 months after the 
     date of enactment of this Act on how the Federal government 
     can promote the use of broadband services through e-
     government, including--
       (1) online delivery of government services;
       (2) video-streaming of government press events and open 
     public events, such as announcements and administrative 
     proceedings;
       (3) e-health and online education initiatives;
       (4) access to government documents; and
       (5) the ramifications of enhanced government online 
     services on user privacy and the security of the Federal 
     government's electronic infrastructure.
                                 ______