Legislature(2017 - 2018)GRUENBERG 120
02/06/2018 03:00 PM House STATE AFFAIRS
Note: the audio
and video
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HCR2 | |
| HB168|| HCR10 | |
| HJR31 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HCR 2 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 168 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HCR 10 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HJR 31 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HJR 31-CONGRESS REVERSE FCC ON NET NEUTRALITY
3:47:28 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the final order of business
would be HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 31, Urging the United States
Congress to overturn the Federal Communications Commission's
order ending net neutrality.
3:47:56 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT KAWASAKI, Alaska State Legislature, as
prime sponsor of HJR 31, paraphrased in part from his sponsor
statement, included in the committee packet, which read as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
In December 2017, the Federal Communication Commission
(FCC) adopted an order to reverse regulations that had
established a federal broadband policy of net
neutrality and attempted to preempt states from
imposing regulations on Internet Service Providers
(ISPs).
Net neutrality protects an individual's ability to
access and transmit information on a free and open
internet. Without net neutrality, ISPs can lawfully
slow down and block access to sites and charge
customers higher rates to access certain websites,
download music or watch videos. The FCC's order to
repeal net neutrality risks making the internet into
an unfair pay-to-play system for small businesses and
individual users.
Alaska's isolation from the Lower 48 means our
citizens rely heavily on the internet for
communication, commerce and emergencies. Many Alaskan
communities already struggle to obtain stable,
affordable internet access. Alaskans First Amendment
rights of free speech, free press and free association
are also at risk without a net neutral environment
enabling the free and open flow of thoughts, ideas and
concerns over the internet.
Upon approval, this resolution would urge the United
States Congress to exercise its authority under the
Congressional Review Act to overturn the Federal
Communication Commission's regulatory decision to
reverse net neutrality protections.
3:50:40 PM
JACOB GERRISH, Staff, Representative Scott Kawasaki, Alaska
State Legislature, on behalf of Representative Kawasaki, prime
sponsor of HJR 31, gave a brief history of net neutrality by
paraphrasing from his written testimony, which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
In the 1996 Telecom Act, Congress made a distinction
between two types of services: "telecommunications
services" (Title II) and "information services."
(Title I) "Telecommunications services" transmit a
user's information from one designated point to
another without changing the form or content of that
information. For example, a phone call transmits the
user's voice from one point to another without
changing the content of the voice message, similar to
the way a pizza delivery service transports a pizza
from the pizza parlor to someone's home. "Information
services," on the other hand, offer a user the
capability to create, store, or process information.
An information service is like a website hosting
service, an online content creator, or an online
social media service. Based on the definitions in the
1996 Telecom Act, in 2002 the FCC classified cable
broadband as an "information service," but attempted
to regulate Internet Service Providers (ISPs) as a
"telecommunications service" by imposing common
carrier-style telecommunications regulations. In this
way, the FCC attempted to enforce net neutrality
without specifically classifying ISPs as utility-style
service provider. The FCC was attempting to find a
common middle ground for net neutrality supporters and
ISPs.
In 2007 Comcast was caught slowing down people's
internet (also known as throttling) and the FCC issued
an order to stop the throttling and tell subscribers
exactly how it managed their traffic. Comcast took the
order to court and in 2010, a judge found that the FCC
lacked the authority to enforce the open internet
principles exactly because Comcast was classified as
an information service provider, and not a
telecommunications provider. Earlier that year, the
FCC Chairman, Julius Genachowski, had attempted to
bolster net neutrality rules by applying some Title II
regulations to Title I services. When those
regulations went into effect in 2011, this time they
were immediately challenged by Verizon and MetroPCS.
In 2014, DC Circuit Court Judge David Tatel again
ruled in favor of the broadband companies and found
that unless ISPs were reclassified as a Title II
"telecommunications service", it would be illegal for
the FCC to impose any common carrier regulations on
them. In that ruling, he specifically stated,
"Broadband providers represent a threat to internet
openness."
MR. GERRISH relayed that since 1996, the FCC has intended to
regulate net neutrality; however, it found through the various
court cases that to do so would require reclassifying ISPs as
Title II telecommunication services. He stated that the 2017
FCC rule-making proposal reclassified the ISPs as Title I
services, thereby eliminating the authority of the federal
government to enforce net neutrality.
3:54:48 PM
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH opined that "I think we're kind of getting
the cart ahead of horse here." He offered that the law is in
the process of being changed; Alaska has an opportunity to weigh
in on this issue through its congressional delegation; and he
suggested that those who were around during the time of rotary
phones remember the days of heavy-handed government regulation
involved in the phone service, which kept that phone in place
for many years. He opined that the proposed resolution would
interject government regulation into a process that arguably has
advanced the United States; from a technology and internet
standpoint, the country has done very well. He maintained that
he is concerned with having the regulatory engagement throttled
back and managed in the way proposed.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH stated that he does not support HJR 31 and
its objective and believes it is unnecessary because Alaska's
congressional delegation will be taking a hard look at the
issue. He added that he is not sure the Congressional Review
Act is the appropriate vehicle in this situation. He offered
that he understands the intent of the proposed resolution but is
skeptical that inviting the government in to manage the effort
is good for the end consumer.
3:56:58 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP asked for confirmation of his understanding
that the "failure" was due to ISPs not being classified as Title
II services, proposed in the court case, but remaining
classified as Title I services.
MR. GERRISH answered that before 2015, ISPs were classified as
Title I information service providers. When they were caught
slowing down the internet, the FCC issued an order requiring
them to stop. The ISPs took the issue to court and the ruling
stated that under Title I, the FCC did not have enforcement
powers. In 2015, the FCC reclassified ISPs as Title II
telecommunication service providers; the FCC was taken to court
again, resulting in the order for net neutrality regulations to
be upheld. He relayed that under Title II, the federal
government has enforcement powers, under Title I, it does not.
The 2017 [FCC] resolution [Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)]
returned ISP classification back to Title I; therefore, the FCC
has no powers to enforce net neutrality.
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP asked why the FCC returned ISP
classification back to Title I.
MR. GERRISH replied that he believed the decision was subject to
the opinion of the FCC chairman at the time.
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP expressed that he does not understand the
potential outcome of the repeal of net neutrality. He offered
his understanding that with the repeal, internet speed and
services would be subjective, while with net neutrality,
government mandates open and equal access to the internet.
MR. GERRISH agreed.
3:59:22 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX cited the sponsor statement, which read,
"The FCC's decision is extremely unpopular with the American
public. A survey conducted by the University of Maryland found
that 83 percent of Americans opposed repealing net neutrality."
She asked whether the survey was a "push poll"; she questioned
whether 83 percent of Americans even know what net neutrality
is, let alone have an opinion on it.
MR. GERRISH answered that the survey is included in the
committee packet for review. He expressed his belief that it
was not a push poll; the breakdown of responses by party
affiliation revealed that both Democrats and Republicans support
net neutrality.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX pointed out that the goal of the proposed
resolution is to have the issue addressed by the U.S. Congress
under the Congressional Review Act. She suggested that since
net neutrality was repealed in December 4, 2017, and submission
to the U.S. Congress for reversal of the rule under the Act must
be done within 60 days, in the time it would take the
legislature to act on the resolution, that deadline would have
passed.
MR. GERRISH expressed his belief that the 60 days begins after
the new regulation has been added to the Federal Register, and
that has not occurred yet.
4:01:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK commented that his 26-year-old son, who
doesn't follow any legislation, has expressed strong support
along with his friends for net neutrality; it is an issue
important to people who spend a great deal of time on the
internet.
4:02:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL commented that he has followed the net
neutrality issue throughout its history; he noted that many
millions of people commented to the FCC about the issue; he
agreed that it is a very important issue; and he expressed his
concern that without net neutrality, consumers will be paying
extra for access to certain internet websites in addition to
their monthly data plans. He stated that he supports the intent
of the proposed resolution.
4:03:27 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced HJR 31 would be held over.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HCR002 Sponsor Statement 2.22.17.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HCR 2 |
| HCR002 ver J 1.29.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HCR 2 |
| HCR002 Fiscal Note LEG 02.02.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HCR 2 |
| HCR002 Supporting Document- Article ABADA.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HCR 2 |
| HCR002 Supporting Document- Article ABADA-AMHB.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HCR 2 |
| HCR002 Supporting Document- Article CDC Injury Prevention & Control Division of Violence Prevention.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HCR 2 |
| HCR002 Supporting Document- Article Felitti.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HCR 2 |
| HCR002 Supporting Document- Article Yosef.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HCR 2 |
| HCR002 Supporting Document- Letter of Support AK Resilience Initiative 1.9.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HCR 2 |
| HCR002 Supporting Document- Letter of Support Planned Parenthood 1.29.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HCR 2 |
| HCR 002 Additional Document- Presentation on Overcoming Adverse Childhood Experiences in AK 02.05.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HCR 2 |
| HB168 Sponsor Statement-01.22.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HB 168 |
| HB168-Sectional Analysis-01.22.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HB 168 |
| HB168A 01.22.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HB 168 |
| HB168-Fiscal Note LEG-02.02.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HB 168 |
| HB168-Additional Document- Leg Research-Meetings-01.22.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HB 168 |
| HB168 Additional Document State v ALIVE Voluntary summary and headnotes-2018 01.22.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HB 168 |
| HB168 Additional Document- Statutes Cited 01.22.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HB 168 |
| HCR 10-Sponsor Statement-01.22.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HCR 10 |
| HCR10A 01.22.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HCR 10 |
| HCR10 Fiscal Note LEG-02-02-18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HCR 10 |
| HCR 10 Additional Document-Uniform Rule 20-01.22.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HCR 10 |
| HJR31 Sponsor Statement 1.29.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 31 |
| HJR31 ver A 1.29.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 31 |
| HJR31-LEG-SESS-02-02-18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 31 |
| HJR31 Supporting Document-Dec. 14 Article Business Insider 1.29.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 31 |
| HJR31 Supporting Document-Dec. 15 Article Business Insider 1.29.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 31 |
| HJR31 Supporting Document-Dec. 15 Article NPR 1.29.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 31 |
| HJR31 Supporting Document-Governor's Letter 1.29.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 31 |
| HJR31 Supporting Document-Letter to Attorney General Lindemuth 1.29.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 31 |
| HJR31 Supporting Document-Letter to Congressional Delegation 1.29.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 31 |
| HJR31 Supporting Document-Letter to Senator Murkowski 1.29.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 31 |
| HJR31 Supporting Document-Portugal Payment Package Example 1.29.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 31 |
| HJR31 Supporting Document-Rep. Kawasaki Letter to Governor 1.29.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 31 |
| HJR31 Supporting Documents 1.29.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 31 |
| HJR31 Supporting Documents-Fraudulent Comments from Alaska 02.05.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 31 |
| HJR31 Supporting Documents-Groups Apposed to Reversing Net Neutrality 02.05.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 31 |
| HJR31 Supporting Documents-Pew Study 02.05.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 31 |
| HJR31 Supporting Document-University of Maryland Survey 1.29.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 31 |
| HJR31 Additional Document-Dec. 13 Article Business Insider 1.29.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 31 |
| HJR31 Additional Document-Jan. 4 FCC Order 1.29.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 31 |
| HJR31 Additional Document- ATA Net Neutrality Letter to House State Affairs HJR31 2.06.18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 31 |
| HJR31 Additional Document- ATA Net Neutrality FAQ 2.06 18.pdf |
HSTA 2/6/2018 3:00:00 PM HSTA 2/8/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HJR 31 |