A group of governors and state lawmakers have written letters to the FCC expressing concern about proposed new net neutrality rules. Here are some highlights:
National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL)
• “The exponential growth of the Internet has flourished as a result of both the government’s ‘hand’s off’ approach, ever increasing competition, as well as high consumer demand. Over regulation of the Internet will interfere with future investment and innovations benefiting the health and well-being of its end user customers. Internet users should be given a choice when it comes to selecting a broadband connection that will meet their current and future needs for speed, reliability, quality of service, and capabilities not yet envisioned.”
Governor Bob Riley, Alabama
• “I agree with your stated goal of ensuring the Internet remains an open platform that promotes innovation, investment and competition. However, as you and your fellow Commissioners deliberate over proposed rules I caution you to consider the potential unintended consequences Net Neutrality regulations could have on stifling the very private sector investment and innovation we both value.”
Governor Janice Brewer, Arizona
• “Regulation would deepen the digital divide, negatively impacting underserved communities by delaying the deployment of high speed networks by America’s telecommunications and cable providers. Net neutrality would slow the deployment of infrastructure and new technologies that our nation needs to be competitive. It’s simply bad public policy.”
Governor Mike Beebe, Arkansas
• “I respectfully urge caution as the FCC conducts a rulemaking about network neutrality. I believe there is a very real risk of investment and innovation actually being stifled by unwarranted government intrusions into a process that has flourished under rules set by the market. I found it curious that the FCC intends to expand the network neutrality concepts to the wireless market. I cant think of another marketplace where customers win so regularly through lower prices and more features – in large part because the industry has been lightly regulated and is so competitive.”
Governor Jack Markell, Delaware
• “I spent much of my career in the private sector working to finance and build innovative wireline and wireless communications networks. I understand the challenges of capital formation. I also understand that innovation and differentiation by networks can be just as important as innovation and differentiation on “the edge.”
Governor Martin O’Malley, Maryland
• “I urge the FCC to consider how its proposals for new regulations will affect competition and investments, especially in states such as Maryland where technology-related jobs are critical to our economy. In addition, Maryland is deeply interested in ensuring that the rules, especially as they related to wireless service, do no hamper carriers’ network management efforts to ensure that customers have secure, reliable and innovation services. Lastly, any regulations put forth by the FCC should assure that the public interest products and services, especially relating to health, education, and public safety are given the attention and prioritization necessary to preserve public welfare.
Governor Haley Barbour, Mississippi
• “Over the past several years, the FCC has debated how — or whether — to regulate the host of new infrastructure technologies, data technologies and Web platforms that we now use every day. I believe rushing into network neutrality regulation could hamper the innovation, entrepreneurship and competition that marks today’s communications markets. I have long been an advocate for investing in infrastructure as a way to generate jobs and economic growth. The Internet has grown largely as the result of private sector investment in 21st century infrastructure. It is not just the jobs directly related to new Internet investments, but also the jobs made possible by advanced network capabilities that in a rural state like Mississippi allow good jobs to be created in cities and towns large and small.”
Governor Jay Nixon, Missouri
• “I encourage the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to proceed with caution as it considers any rulemaking regarding net neutrality and extending its principles to the wireless market. As it moves forward, the FCC must ensure that sufficient regulatory flexibility for service providers remains so that efforts to continue the communications advances that rural and low-income populations have only recently begun to enjoy are not undermined. I believe we can all agree that our regulatory framework must foster a climate that encourages Internet investment and innovation. Such an environment, one based on the public and private sectors working together in common purpose, is crucial to my state and our nation’s competitiveness in the global marketplace.”
Governor Ed Rendell, Pennsylvania
• “But as the leader of a state that needs to promote hundreds of millions of dollars of ongoing investment by private companies to bring our citizens the fastest, most advanced broadband networks, I want to urge you to move with the utmost care…We need network providers to keep improving networks and competing with each other. Any regulations that might have unintended consequences – that might seriously curtail innovation and investment by network providers [of that may force network providers to raise prices] need to be avoided.”
Governor Beverley Perdue, North Carolina
• “The FCC’s concept of the “Four Freedoms,” and the manner in which it has been administered, have created a flourishing and competitive marketplace that has benefitted consumers. I would urge you and your colleagues to proceed cautiously and incrementally in considering any changes to the regulatory principles that have served the country so well.”
Governor Brad Henry, Oklahoma
• “A consistent infusion of investment capital in new technology by a variety of communications providers has been a significant factor in this growth in broadband and wireless services in Oklahoma. This capital has also created job opportunities for more Oklahomans who are needed to build and maintain networks and sell these new services.”
Governor Rick Perry, Texas
• “I am concerned that the FCC’s recent call for increased government management of the Internet under the guise of “Network Neutrality” could have the opposite effect. Adding new layers of federal bureaucracy and regulations without a clear and compelling need for such onesize- fits-all government mandates will only discourage companies from investing in Texas and could have negative ramifications on what we have worked so hard to accomplish here. The creation of additional uncertainty, costs and disincentives to investment and job creation is the last thing our nation needs in the current economic climate.”
Public Service Commissioner, Kevin Cramer, North Dakota
• “With respect to net neutrality, it is critical the Commission examine market data for evidence of a quantifiable problem. For too long, this debate has been about competing Internet ideologies rather than a conversation rooted in demonstrable fact. A state regulatory Commission could never make rules solely on the basis of alleged competition or lack thereof; I hope the FCC will pursue that same standard of rigorous analysis.”
Governor Mark Parkinson, Kansas
• “We have a responsibility to clear the path for individuals to access the possibilities the Internet offers. Kansas is a largely rural state, and wireless technology is a key component to making broadband available in some of our least densely populated areas. Respectifully, I would urge caution as the FCC conducts a rule-making study as to avoid unwarranted consequences that may disrupt progress.”
Governor Sonny Perdue, Georgia
• “It is important that the FCC encourage the continued growth of these vital industries by avoiding Net neutrality regulation of broadband deployment. The FCC should focus on providing incentives to get faster broadband deployed throughout the nation. Smart policies, centered on letting the competitive marketplace operate unhindered by intrusive Net neutrality regulations, will result in additional investment, high paying local jobs and the deployment of new technology.”
The National Association of Manufacturers and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce
• “The $63 billion invested last year in broadband infrastructure by the telecommunications industry was five times the amount spent by the federal government on broadband, according to the Communications Workers of America. Moreover, the ‘cost to make broadband universally available…falls in the $20-350 billion range,’ according to the Commission’s Broadband Task Force.1 A broad and open-ended rulemaking on net neutrality rules at this point in our struggling economy could only work to discourage and stifle this level of necessary investment in broadband infrastructure. Encouraging broadband deployment is critical to our national recovery, as it is the very platform which encourages job creation, application and content innovation, increasing efficiencies in manufacturing, and the promotion of consumer and community well-being through the use of online healthcare, education and entertainment resources.”
Attorney General Jon Bruning, Nebraska
• “I’m writing today to urge you to proceed deliberately and cautiously as the Federal Communications Commission considers any rulemaking regarding net neutrality. Expanding network neutrality to the wireless market may stifle competition and discourage private investment. It is clear that private sector investment has led to increased competition, the result of which is a better, faster online experience for consumers. We must continue to encourage success and innovation in broadband through thoughtful policies that don’t over-regulate or encumber investment.”
The National Foundation for Women Legislators
• “If net neutrality principles are codified and adopted, we will be taking a step backward. It would limit the innovation in how broadband services are delivered and who pays for them. Net neutrality will force one model on everyone – one in which the consumer will pick up the tab. That will make the service even further out of reach financially for too many consumers.”
Governor Jon Corzine, New Jersey
• “The rules must create the right incentives for continuing to invest in the Internet’s infrastructure. Regulations that have the effect of discouraging investment by network providers, those who have constructed our nation’s information superhighway, should be avoided. Our broadband networks operate less efficiently than those of other nations; we need rules that help close this gap and support continuing innovation.”
Elia Germani, Chairman of the Rhode Island Public Utilities Commission
• “The Internet has been a powerful engine for innovation, investment in new technologies, and jobs creation across Rhode Island and our country. It is imperative that we maintain the continued investment by phone, cable, cellular, electric and other providers in broadband networks that will ensure healthy competition and continue to drive down prices. I fear that any new network neutrality regulation could severely impede that spirit of innovation and entrepreneurship that is the hallmark of the existing telecommunications marketplace.”
Representative Barbara Ballard, Kansas
• “Like much of the country, Kansas has suffered from a decrease in capital investment and slowed job growth. I strongly support President Obama’s vision to create new jobs and we must create opportunities that keep us on a positive trajectory for growth. Net neutrality regulation runs contrary to this agenda.”
One Response to “Governors and State Legislators Joining Choir on Net Neutrality Rules”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
October 30th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
[...] Internet. Given the FCC’s new proposed rules on Net neutrality, and the resulting groundswell of public commentary on this issue, the event was both timely and [...]