[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 202 (Tuesday, December 12, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Page S7951]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                             Net Neutrality

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, for more than two decades, under both 
Republican and Democratic Presidents and Republican and Democratic 
Congresses, the United States pursued a bipartisan light-touch approach 
to internet regulation. The internet as we know it today flourished 
under this light-touch approach, much to the benefit of American 
consumers and the domestic economy. It also made America the world 
leader in internet technology and positioned us to continue that 
leadership in the years to come.
  In 2002, broadband internet was classified by the Federal 
Communications Commission, or FCC, our Nation's communications 
regulator, as an information service under title I of the 
Communications Act. This classification exempted the internet from 
burdensome regulations contained in title II of the Communications Act, 
which were designed in the Depression era for the old telephone 
monopolies.
  Under the Obama administration, we saw repeated attempts to bring the 
internet under greater government control. Finally, in 2015, at the 
explicit direction of President Obama, the FCC did as it was told and 
reclassified broadband internet access service as a title II service, 
subjecting broadband internet to onerous common carrier rules and 
opening the door to further regulation, including price regulation. Not 
surprisingly, with heavier regulation came a decline in broadband 
investment. Indeed, we have seen private investment in broadband 
infrastructure decline over the past 2 years. This decline should not 
be mistaken as a sign that broadband infrastructure is not needed. In 
fact, the opposite is true, as there are still 34 million Americans who 
lack access to broadband services at home.
  In States like my home State of South Dakota, encouraging broadband 
deployment continues to be critical to ensuring that rural areas have 
the same economic opportunity as their urban counterparts. The Federal 
Government should not be putting up barriers to broadband deployment; 
it should be removing them. Congress and the FCC need to ensure 
regulatory framework is in place that protects consumers but that 
doesn't stand in the way of investment and innovation.
  Prior to the FCC's 2015 actions to bring broadband under title II, 
and for more than a decade under the light-touch regulatory framework 
of title I, we saw unprecedented growth that revolutionized our daily 
lives and allowed us to stay better connected with our loved ones. The 
internet created new jobs and expanded opportunities for education and 
commerce. It became the greatest engine of innovation for our times.
  Despite the fearmongering and doomsday rhetoric that continues to 
plague this debate, when the FCC moves forward and restores the 
internet to its pre-2015 regulatory status, the internet will continue 
to thrive and serve as an engine for future economic growth.
  I commend Chairman Pai at the FCC and the entire Commission for all 
the hard work over the last year that has gotten us to this point. I 
also commend Chairman Pai for his commitment to transparency throughout 
this process. For the first time in the history of the Commission, 
under Chairman Pai's leadership, the public was able to view the 
Restoring Internet Freedom item 3 weeks prior to the FCC's vote. That 
is true of all documents to be considered by the Commission--a major 
departure from the previous administration's actions, which were often 
not made public until the very last minute. As a result of Chairman 
Pai's commitment to transparency, the public has the benefit of not 
only viewing the item but also participating in the process.
  Despite attempts by those more interested in politicizing the issue 
and distracting from this debate, this item resulted in the most well 
informed and most exhaustive record of comments ever submitted to the 
FCC. The FCC is now well positioned to move forward to ensure that the 
internet is open and free. Regrettably, however, debate doesn't end 
there. The outcry from opponents of the FCC's proposal is that the 
internet will fall apart without adequate consumer protections.
  There is obviously immense passion that follows the issue of net 
neutrality. Americans care deeply about preserving a free and open 
internet, as do I and so many of my colleagues in the U.S. Senate on 
both sides of the aisle.
  As I have stated repeatedly and I will say again today, congressional 
action is the only way to solve the endless back-and-forth on net 
neutrality rules that we have seen over the past several years. If my 
colleagues on the other side of the aisle and those who claim to 
support net neutrality rules want to enshrine protections for consumers 
with the backing of the law, I call on them today to join me in 
discussing legislation that would do just that. While we are not going 
to agree on everything, I believe there is much room for compromise.
  Many of us in Congress already agree on many of the principles of net 
neutrality. True supporters of an open internet should be demanding 
such legislative protections today, not posturing while waiting for 
years during protracted legal proceedings or waiting for the political 
winds to shift.
  If Republicans and Democrats have the political support to work 
together on such a compromise, we can enact a regulatory framework that 
will stand the test of time. I have stood willing to work with any and 
all supporters of net neutrality protections for many years now, and I 
continue to stand ready today.
  It is time for Congress to settle this debate, and I welcome 
discussion on ways to ensure a free and open internet for decades to 
come.