Legislature(2017 - 2018)BARNES 124
03/05/2018 03:15 PM House LABOR & COMMERCE
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 | |
| HB353 | |
| Adjourn | |
| HB353 | |
| HB277 | |
| HB309 |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 309 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 277 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 353 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 277-BROADBAND INTERNET: NEUTRALITY/REGULATION
3:59:25 PM
CHAIR KITO announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 277, "An Act relating to the regulation of
broadband Internet; and making certain actions by broadband
Internet service providers unlawful acts or practices under the
Alaska Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Act."
3:59:24 PM
JACOB GERRISH, Staff, Representative Scott Kawasaki,
reintroduced HB 277 on behalf of Representative Kawasaki, prime
sponsor. He said HB 277 would require internet service
providers (ISPs) to engage in net neutrality practices for all
users.
4:00:29 PM
TOM BRADY, Engineering Manager, Microcom, Testified in the
hearing on HB 277. He explained that net neutrality is only
possible when bandwidth is unlimited. When an ISP has unlimited
bandwidth, it has no reason to prioritize one service over
another. He stated bandwidth is limited, particularly in rural
Alaska. He said the market allocates the scarce resource of
bandwidth. He added that technically, not all internet packets
are equal. He said he wondered whether there have been
complaints about packages being treated unfairly before or after
2015 when net neutrality was created. He asked, "What is the
extent of the problem we are trying to solve?" He suggested the
general lack of bandwidth in Alaska forces an allocation of
resources. He said doing away with a market-based allocation
and replacing it with a government-adjudication allocation would
reintroduce a period of chaos until the government determines
who gets to have what and would slow down deployment of more
bandwidth in the rural market since quality of service would be
differentiated based on the government's perception of need.
4:04:01 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL asked what changed in 2015.
MR. BRADY answered that in 2015 the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) imposed net neutrality and it was reversed in
2017.
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL asked whether the system was neutral prior
to 2015.
MR. BRADY explained that prior to 2015 there was no requirement
for neutrality.
CHAIR KITO shared his understanding that before 2015, there was
no regulation but there was concern that there could be
differential pricing schemes put into place. In 2015, there was
an administrative order that restricted that opportunity and
that order was repealed in 2017. He said there were not any
changes or restrictions seen in how things had been operating.
MR. BRADY restated his query whether anything had happened
before or since 2015, or since 2017, that posed a problem.
CHAIR KITO said that he thought it was a concern that there
might be inequitable activity in the area of internet service.
MR. BRADY answered that since Alaska has services from a
national provider, if Alaska ends up being substantially
different, there is a risk of the national provider exiting the
state.
4:08:52 PM
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH shared his understanding that the issue is
largely a federal issue, not a local or a state issue. He asked
whether Mr. Brady felt it is a federal issue.
MR. BRADY answered in the affirmative. He clarified that in the
case of AT&T, the company would have to manage its service
differently in Alaska and Kansas and this could prove onerous
and could be overturned at a federal level.
4:10:12 PM
GEORGE PIERCE testified in support of HB 277. He said the state
depends on the freedom of the internet. He suggested that to
limit access to information puts free speech on the line and is
more important than pricing issue. He said 60 percent of people
in the state live in rural Alaska and restricted broadband is
crucial to rural Alaska's lifeline.
4:12:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH asked Mr. Pierce whether he has any
personal experience with problems with the internet.
MR. PIERCE answered, "They slowed it down."
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH asked for confirmation that he had personal
experience with internet speeds slowing.
MR. PIERCE answered in the affirmative.
4:14:36 PM
JODE SPARKS testified in support of HB 277. He said as a youth
he goes online to study, relax, shop, interact with friends, and
interact with different viewpoints around the world. He gave
the example of teleconferences with other students around the
world. He said telecommunications is important to teaching and
learning in Alaska. He said when the current administration
proposed changes to net neutrality, polls cited 83 percent
approval [of net neutrality]. He mentioned the executive action
of the governor of Washington state against the repeal of net
neutrality.
4:17:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP asked whether there were other states
besides Washington and Montana which had taken action against
the repeal of net neutrality.
MR. SPARKS answered that he did not know, but that the repeal
had only occurred in December [2017].
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH asked whether Mr. Sparks had witnessed any
intentional slowing down of bandwidth.
MR. SPARKS explained that industry hasn't taken action yet, but
that he felt he could not have faith in the industry self-
regulating.
4:20:31 PM
KYRSTYN KELLY testified in support of HB 277. She explained
that many communities do not have broad access to ISPs. She
stated it was a huge concern as those communities rely on
internet service for education. She shared her belief that
industry would not self-regulate.
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH said he thinks there is competition
available and that a customer can choose another provider if
they feel the service they receive is not adequate. He asked
whether Ms. Kelly had personal experience with broadband
slowing.
MS. KELLY answered that she had not, but that it is too early to
see.
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL reiterated his question regarding net
neutrality and whether it has changed since the inception of the
internet.
MR. GERRISH answered the executive order has not gone into
effect and that he thought the date would be April 23rd [2018].
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL asked whether the proposed bill is a
symbolic gesture, or whether it was intended to ensure that the
internet service in the state is not throttled further at a
state level.
MR. GERRISH answered that he did not want to speak to the intent
of the bill, but that he thought it may have both effects.
4:26:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH shared his understanding that the FTC
managed the internet from 1996 to 2015, when the authority was
moved to the FCC and it just went back to the FTC. He asked
whether it was Mr. Gerrish's understanding as well.
MR. GERRISH answered it is not his understanding. He explained
that 1996 was when the Title 1 and Title 2 service distinction
was made. He added net neutrality has been the regulation
standard since 1996. He said there have been cases of companies
caught slowing services. He gave the example of ComCast slowing
a site called BitTorrent. He said the FCC had issued an order
to stop the throttling at the time.
4:28:55 PM
JEANIE PIERCE testified in support of HB 277. She stated that
Netflix had been slowed down. She stated the repeal would not
be implemented until April 30 [2018], so no change would be seen
yet.
4:30:29 PM
CHAIR KITO closed public testimony on HB 277 upon ascertaining
that there was no one else who wished to testify.
4:30:33 PM
CHAIR KITO commented that he felt the legislation was attempting
to address something that has not happened yet. He added he
thinks there is a need to ensure equitable access to the
internet. He said he was not sure that the bill was the correct
vehicle by which to address the issue.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON said that something happened with net
neutrality in 2017. He said he would support the bill but that
he felt it would act more as a resolution than a bill.
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL commented that sending a signal to Congress
was worth doing and he would support the bill.
4:34:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH stated his objection to moving the bill due
to the risk that companies could move away. He said he thought
it was good to have a choice. He said it should be a federal
issue.
REPRESENTATIVE SULLIVAN-LEONARD said she shared the concerns
stated by Representative Birch. She added that she saw a "fear
factor" in the proposed bill and she would not be supporting it.
4:37:24 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP said that he likes the net neutrality
concept. He said he preferred to wait until there is a problem.
He said he though industry should have the right to market their
product as faster service.
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL said he does not pay for the fastest
internet service and he does not have access to more ISPs in his
area. He said he supports the net neutrality concept.
4:39:52 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL moved to report HB 277 out of committee with
individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes.
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Josephson, Wool,
Stutes, and Kito voted in favor of HB 277. Representatives
Sullivan-Leonard, Knopp, and Birch voted against it. Therefore,
HB 277 was reported out of the House Labor and Commerce Standing
Committee by a vote of 4-3.