Legislature(2017 - 2018)BARNES 124

02/09/2018 03:15 PM 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.

Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as

Audio Topic
03:21:11 PM Start
03:22:34 PM HB318
03:38:25 PM HB277
04:51:06 PM Presentation: Temporary Specialty Dentistry
05:00:36 PM Adjourn
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
Heard & Held
-- Public Testimony --
Heard & Held
-- Public Testimony --
+ Presentation: Temporary Specialty Dentistry TELECONFERENCED
Licenses by Dave Logan DDS, Exec. Dir., AK
Dental Society
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
        HB 277-BROADBAND INTERNET: NEUTRALITY/REGULATION                                                                    
3:38:25 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."                                                                     
3:38:45 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE   SCOTT   KAWASAKI,  Alaska   State   Legislature,                                                               
presented HB  277 as prime  sponsor.  He paraphrased  the sponsor                                                               
statement,   which  reads   as   follows  [original   punctuation                                                               
     HB 277 would require  Internet Service Providers (ISPs)                                                                    
     who  provide  broadband  Internet to  Alaskan  families                                                                    
     engage  in the  practice  of net  neutrality. The  bill                                                                    
     would make  sure all  data on  the Internet  is treated                                                                    
     equally.  It   would  protect  small   businesses  from                                                                    
     uncompetitive practices and guarantee  an open and free                                                                    
     internet for all users.                                                                                                    
     Without  net  neutrality,  ISPs may  legally  speed  up                                                                    
     certain  sites,  slow  down  others,  block  sites  all                                                                    
     together,  and require  certain users  to pay  more for                                                                    
     Internet fast lanes. The  elimination of net neutrality                                                                    
     gives  ISPs  the  power   to  determine  what  websites                                                                    
     consumers   could  visit   and  what   content  website                                                                    
     creators  could share.  Allowing  ISPs to  discriminate                                                                    
     based on content undermines a free and open Internet.                                                                      
     On  multiple  occasions,  millions  of  Americans  have                                                                    
     publicly   commented  in   favor   of  protecting   net                                                                    
     neutrality  and  have  spoken out  against  the  recent                                                                    
     Federal  Communications Commission  order to  eliminate                                                                    
     net neutrality rules implemented  in 2015. The internet                                                                    
     is a  modern necessity for individuals  and businesses.                                                                    
     Net neutrality  is widely supported by  consumer rights                                                                    
     groups, privacy groups, and businesses organizations.                                                                      
     This  bill would  ensure that  the  Internet remains  a                                                                    
     platform  for  unrestricted  economic  competition  and                                                                    
     free   communication.  I   respectfully  request   your                                                                    
     support for HB 277.                                                                                                        
3:40:50 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE   KAWASAKI  paraphrased   from  "Fast   Facts  for                                                               
Conservatives on Net Neutrality,"  [included in committee packet]                                                               
published  by  the   Christian  Coalition  [original  punctuation                                                               
provided], which reads as follows:                                                                                              
     "Net neutrality"  policies helped create the  most free                                                                    
     and fair marketplace in  history, allowing consumers to                                                                    
     choose  the   winners  and  losers  in   a  competitive                                                                    
     marketplace. This resulted in  the best ideas, products                                                                    
     and services rising to top.                                                                                                
     The  Internet   currently  provides  a   megaphone  for                                                                    
     political expression  by virtue of the  fact that every                                                                    
     site, no matter  how obscure, is just  as accessible to                                                                    
     every  individual  as  any site  with  a  multi-million                                                                    
     dollar budget.  Every American  has the  opportunity to                                                                    
     create their  own site  and say what  they want  to the                                                                    
     entire world.                                                                                                              
     Politicians that are sitting  idle and empowering cable                                                                    
     and phone monopolies to have  power over what consumers                                                                    
     can  see  on   the  Internet  are  some   of  the  same                                                                    
     politicians  that  would  criticize countries  such  as                                                                    
     China for  not allowing its  citizens to be  exposed to                                                                    
     the free market of ideas represented on the web.                                                                           
     Congress has wisely  decided many times in  the past to                                                                    
     avoid  stunting  the growth  of  the  Internet via  new                                                                    
     taxation.  They should  follow the  same logic  in this                                                                    
     case and  not allow  the cable  and phone  companies to                                                                    
     stunt  its  growth  with new  fees  and  content  based                                                                    
     discrimination.  In   the  end,  the  losers   will  be                                                                    
     consumers, businesses  and those  who use  the Internet                                                                    
     for political expression.                                                                                                  
3:42:30 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON asked for more information.                                                                            
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI explained it was a position paper issued                                                                
in 2015 when the debates on net neutrality began.                                                                               
3:43:17 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE SULLIVAN-LEONARD stated the federal government                                                                   
was enacting the policy and asked whether the bill would set                                                                    
apart  the state  to  make  its own  mandate  or whether  federal                                                               
guidelines would still have to be followed.                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI  specified net  neutrality was  in effect                                                               
following  the  debate  in  2015,   then  in  December  2017  net                                                               
neutrality was repealed at  the Federal Communications Commission                                                               
(FCC).    He  stated  Congress   has  been  looking  at  enacting                                                               
bipartisan  legislation to  uphold net  neutrality.   He said  30                                                               
states have  introduced legislation very  similar to HB 277.   He                                                               
added  that 2  governors have  signed executive  orders that  net                                                               
neutrality shall be  the law of the land in  their states, and 24                                                               
governors and  attorneys general have entered  litigation against                                                               
the federal  government.  He  said the question was  premature as                                                               
it had not yet been litigated.                                                                                                  
3:45:15 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  KITO asked  how the  current situation  is different  from                                                               
what was happening prior to 2015.                                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE  KAWASAKI answered  there had  been a  significant                                                               
lawsuit filed against  a large company engaging  in the practices                                                               
outlined in HB 277.                                                                                                             
REPRESENTATIVE  WOOL  asked  whether   the  proposed  bill  would                                                               
stipulate that  the state  "can't throttle  up and  throttle down                                                               
different aspects of the internet  pipe" and whether there was an                                                               
entity "further up the line" that could.                                                                                        
REPRESENTATIVE   KAWASAKI  clarified   that  the   state  doesn't                                                               
"throttle  up  or  down,"  but  the state  would  be  saying  the                                                               
internet  service providers  (ISPs)  operating  within the  state                                                               
would have to treat all internet  activity as it is treated under                                                               
net neutrality and could not throttle speeds or block websites.                                                                 
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL  asked if the  ISPs in the state  are getting                                                               
internet  from a  parent  company outside  the  state that  could                                                               
throttle speeds.                                                                                                                
3:48:20 PM                                                                                                                    
JAKE GERRISH, Staff, Representative  Scott Kawasaki, Alaska State                                                               
Legislature,  answered   questions  on   HB  277  on   behalf  of                                                               
Representative  Kawasaki, prime  sponsor.   He explained  ISPs in                                                               
Alaska are connected to other  ISPs, called "backbone providers,"                                                               
which  theoretically could  slow down  services to  the secondary                                                               
ISPs.   He underlined that  with net neutrality  protections, all                                                               
ISPs  would be  under the  same  regulations so  that no  company                                                               
could slow down service for end users.                                                                                          
REPRESENTATIVE  WOOL asked  whether,  if  the federal  government                                                               
does  not pass  net neutrality  legislation, a  backbone provider                                                               
delivering content to an instate  provider could lower speeds for                                                               
the local ISP.                                                                                                                  
MR. GERRISH answered that could be a possibility.                                                                               
3:50:37 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  JOSEPHSON  asked  whether it  was  Mr.  Gerrish's                                                               
understanding that  a state under  its sovereign  authority could                                                               
dispense with constitutional  issues about the powers  of the FCC                                                               
and  regulate  and  control  the speeds  of  its  internet  users                                                               
internally.   He  spoke to  principals of  federal constitutional                                                               
law and  gave the example of  yoghurt that comes into  the state,                                                               
which can  be regulated by  the federal government as  it travels                                                               
interstate.  He asked whether the question had been considered                                                                  
MR. GERRISH answered that it  had been considered and pointed out                                                               
that similar legislation  is being litigated in  other states and                                                               
they are further ahead in the  process.  He suggested that seeing                                                               
how those cases are decided would inform how to move forward.                                                                   
3:52:18 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR KITO  spoke to  differences in  telecommunication providers                                                               
in  Alaska.   He  gave the  example  of AT&T  and  GCI and  asked                                                               
whether, if  the proposed  bill were to  pass but  net neutrality                                                               
was  not  passed  at  a  national   level,  GCI  would  be  at  a                                                               
disadvantage in  competition with  AT&T as  GCI could  not change                                                               
their capacity in response to users, but AT&T could.                                                                            
MR.  GERRISH  answered that  he  did  not  think so  because  the                                                               
backbone providers  that both  companies rely  on are  outside of                                                               
the state.   He said  the internet was  "just a series  of tubes"                                                               
transferring  information from  one location  to another  and the                                                               
backbone providers rely on similar fiberoptic and copper cables.                                                                
CHAIR KITO asked who the backbone providers are.                                                                                
MR. GERRISH shared his understanding  that those companies can be                                                               
larger companies  as well as  non-profits such as  the University                                                               
of Maryland.                                                                                                                    
CHAIR KITO said  he was not sure at what  point the proposed bill                                                               
would provide protections for  the organizations, individuals, or                                                               
companies moving the data.                                                                                                      
3:55:37 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH  spoke to regulation in  the phone industry.                                                               
He opined deregulation  helped the phone industry  to lower costs                                                               
and innovate.  He asked  whether Mr. Gerrish saw any disadvantage                                                               
to eliminating the competition.                                                                                                 
3:58:19 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.  GERRISH paraphrased  from "Fast  Facts for  Conservatives on                                                               
Net  Neutrality," which  reads as  follows [original  punctuation                                                               
     "Net neutrality"  policies helped create the  most free                                                                    
     and fair marketplace in  history, allowing consumers to                                                                    
     choose  the   winners  and  losers  in   a  competitive                                                                    
     marketplace. This resulted in  the best ideas, products                                                                    
     and services rising to top."                                                                                               
MR. GERRISH  added that net  neutrality allows  the internet                                                                    
to act as the marketplace.   He posited that eliminating net                                                                    
neutrality  would  hand  over  the  power  to  the  ISPs  to                                                                    
regulate access to websites and thereby distort the market.                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE  BIRCH responded  that he  felt the  power of  the                                                               
consumer to  choose from multiple competitors  was being ignored.                                                               
He gave the  analogy of a supermarket and stated  he could choose                                                               
to  frequent a  store  where  he gets  better  service at  better                                                               
prices.  He added he  was concerned about eliminating competition                                                               
and  that  he  would  prefer  to  let  it  be  a  consumer-driven                                                               
4:00:43 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  JOSEPHSON  said  it  seemed that  the  intent  of                                                               
HB 277 was  to encourage  open competition and  what the  FCC did                                                               
was to create  inequality between the vendors  rather than create                                                               
an  equal playing  field.   He  posited the  proposed  bill is  a                                                               
conservative bill aimed  at deregulation.  He  asked whether that                                                               
was correct.                                                                                                                    
MR.  GERRISH answered  that  was the  intention  of the  proposed                                                               
bill.   He  pointed out  the broad  support for  the legislation,                                                               
from the  Christian Coalition to ACLU.   He spoke to  the concern                                                               
regarding market choice  and the idea that the  consumers want to                                                               
keep  the internet  free  and  open and  would  not purchase  the                                                               
service of an ISP that hinders  that.  He suggested that when the                                                               
first  ISP starts  charging for  priority lanes,  all the  others                                                               
will have to do the same to stay competitive.                                                                                   
4:03:05 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  KITO spoke  to Representative  Josephson's statement  that                                                               
the  aim of  the proposed  bill is  to provide  an equal  playing                                                               
field  through   deregulation,  but   he  said  he   thought  net                                                               
neutrality was a  regulation.  He pointed to page  1, line 13, of                                                               
the  new bill  language and  asked  what "utility"  means in  the                                                               
context of the proposed legislation.                                                                                            
MR. GERRISH  answered that  in the  language "utility"  refers to                                                               
broadband internet access services.                                                                                             
CHAIR  KITO suggested  the state  does  not have  the ability  to                                                               
restrict any national  companies' activities and he  wanted to be                                                               
certain  the proposed  bill  would be  creating  an even  playing                                                               
field for local ISPs.                                                                                                           
4:06:40 PM                                                                                                                    
TARA RICH, Legal  and Policy Director, ACLU  of Alaska, testified                                                               
in the hearing on  HB 277.  She presented as  an analogy that "it                                                               
would be  really shocking" if telephone  companies were permitted                                                               
to  make a  connection  worse  if a  customer  was  talking to  a                                                               
certain person  the company doesn't  like or were  speaking about                                                               
certain subjects.  She underlined  net neutrality means a company                                                               
that connects consumers  to the internet does not  get to control                                                               
what  one  does  on  the  internet,  including  not  blocking  or                                                               
throttling   content  or   connections.     She  explained   that                                                               
throttling refers  to intentional slowing of  a connection unless                                                               
for  reasonable  network  management  purposes.    She  said  net                                                               
neutrality does  not allow for  paid prioritization.   She stated                                                               
net   neutrality   rules    prevent   ISPs   from   "unreasonably                                                               
disadvantaging" an end  user's content on the internet.   She put                                                               
forward  that  while those  standards  are  not verbatim  in  the                                                               
proposed bill, they are what is referred to as net neutrality.                                                                  
MS.  RICH  gave  some  history  of  telephone  regulation.    She                                                               
explained voice over IP (VOIP)  interrupted the telephone service                                                               
business model and  lead to company mergers  and bundled services                                                               
for internet,  cable, and telephone.   She stated  that currently                                                               
the disruption  is from video streaming  services (Netflix, Hulu)                                                               
so that cable  products are now coming  through internet services                                                               
at much lower prices.  She  underlined that now that the internet                                                               
has grown  to become one  of the primary means  of communication,                                                               
having meaningful rules to  protect communication from censorship                                                               
is critical.                                                                                                                    
MS.  RICH relayed  AT&T censored  a live  stream of  a Pearl  Jam                                                               
concert, silencing the part of  the concert in which Eddie Vedder                                                               
mentioned  President  George  W.  Bush,  as  it  was  deemed  too                                                               
controversial.  She added Verizon  Wireless blocked text messages                                                               
from  pro-choice advocacy  group, NARAL.   In  Canada, a  company                                                               
called Telus  blocked the website  of a  union with which  it was                                                               
engaged in a labor dispute.                                                                                                     
4:12:05 PM                                                                                                                    
MS. RICH responded to Representative  Josephson's concerns that a                                                               
state  law that  regulates  primarily outside  entities might  be                                                               
subject  to  preemption  concerns  or  concerns  under  the  U.S.                                                               
Constitution  regarding  the  commerce  clause.    She  described                                                               
preemption of  a broad field  of regulation which belongs  to the                                                               
federal government, including immigration.   She stated this type                                                               
of service  has never been  deemed to be  the sole domain  of the                                                               
federal government, and that states regulate them consistently.                                                                 
She went on  to discuss conflict preemption as in  Section 253 of                                                               
Title 47  of United  States Code, which  says that  states should                                                               
not  have  the  ability  to prohibit  an  entity  from  providing                                                               
intrastate  telecommunications  service.    She  highlighted  the                                                               
exception  for  rules which  are  in  place to  ensure  continued                                                               
quality of service  or to safeguard the rights  of the consumers.                                                               
She  reiterated  there  is not  a  conflict  preemption  concern.                                                               
Additionally, with respect  to the commerce clause,  this type of                                                               
legislation  has   been  consistently  upheld  as   long  as  the                                                               
legislation is  a neutral,  Alaska-only law.   She said  she felt                                                               
there are surmountable  issues with state law,  including to what                                                               
degree Alaska  law could  affect outside  services such  as AT&T.                                                               
She  highlighted  the  proposed   bill  was  only  for  statewide                                                               
applications.  She reiterated there  are 30 states in the process                                                               
of introducing  similar legislation to restore  net neutrality in                                                               
their states.                                                                                                                   
MS. RICH described peerage agreements.   She stated local IPSs do                                                               
not control how  data is transferred from its source.    She gave                                                               
the example  of GCI  getting its service  through Time  Warner or                                                               
another  ISP  in the  Lower  48,  who  may  have a  dispute  with                                                               
Netflix, perhaps to  try and create a Hulu-only  service.  Alaska                                                               
recipients  would not  have  access to  that  content because  it                                                               
would be blocked  by an agreement over which the  consumer had no                                                               
control.   She added the  market theory  falls apart as  there is                                                               
not  ample choice  in Alaska  for this  service.   She underlined                                                               
high speed  internet is  needed for  services such  as telehealth                                                               
and telemedicine in rural areas in the state.                                                                                   
4:17:51 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE   WOOL  asked   whether  companies'   interest  in                                                               
eliminating net  neutrality was  to limit  the ability  to access                                                               
internet streaming services more easily than paying for cable.                                                                  
MS.  RICH  shared  her  understanding that  the  intent  was  not                                                               
necessarily to block content but  to enable the companies to make                                                               
money.     She went  on  to say  that ISPs  that provide  certain                                                               
content through their  cable television service would  be able to                                                               
offer streaming service as part of their product.                                                                               
4:20:15 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  KITO  spoke to  internet  speed.   He  remarked  equitable                                                               
access seems  like it would  mean everyone could access  the same                                                               
internet speed.   He added there are already  carriers who charge                                                               
more for faster speeds.                                                                                                         
MS. RICH answered  that net neutrality was  not addressing faster                                                               
speeds, but content  creators' access to opportunity.   She added                                                               
net   neutrality  was   about   requiring   that  companies   not                                                               
intentionally  slow  down  services  based on  content.    Larger                                                               
organizations and businesses can  negotiate for prioritization of                                                               
their product  or viewpoint, whereas  a local "mom and  pop shop"                                                               
will  not  have  that  capacity.    She  stated  the  quality  of                                                               
opportunity  was  based   on  content  and  not   on  the  actual                                                               
infrastructure in which the ISP has invested.                                                                                   
REPRESENTATIVE  JOSEPHSON asked  about  the intent  of the  FCC's                                                               
order.   He asked whether it  was designed to create  an exchange                                                               
of commerce  wherein one company  could bid  with an ISP  to slow                                                               
down a competitor's content.                                                                                                    
4:23:35 PM                                                                                                                    
MS. RICH  answered it was out  of her league "speaking  about the                                                               
legislative  intent  of  Chairman  Pai and  some  of  the  former                                                               
Verizon employees who  made this decision at the FCC."   She said                                                               
that   a   key  part   of   net   neutrality  is   called   "paid                                                               
prioritization,"  which   was  one  of   the  pieces   which  was                                                               
dismantled  with the  action taken  in  December.   She gave  the                                                               
example  of  several  wallet   applications  which  were  blocked                                                               
because  they   competed  with  the   ISPs'  own   mobile  wallet                                                               
applications.   She stated she did  not know whether that  was in                                                               
the intent of  the decision but that it was  certainly one of the                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE  WOOL posited  a scenario  in which  Alaska enacts                                                               
its own net neutrality law,  but the federal government does not.                                                               
He said the state would  receive content from a national backbone                                                               
company, and suggested one provider  (Netflix, Hulu) could pay to                                                               
go  faster and  smaller  provider  could not  pay  for the  extra                                                               
speed.   He asked  whether Alaska consumers  would have  the same                                                               
disparity in speed, even with the net neutrality law.                                                                           
4:26:26 PM                                                                                                                    
MS. RICH explained "providers paying  to go faster" refers to the                                                               
content provider  (Netflix or a  small business), and not  to the                                                               
ISP.   She  pointed out  that small  businesses can't  afford the                                                               
same speeds  that bigger businesses  can afford.   Net neutrality                                                               
rules   are   designed   to  prevent   content   providers   from                                                               
accelerating the speed of certain  content, so that users and not                                                               
the ISPs get  to decide where their traffic should  go.  She gave                                                               
the  example of  a  national provider  such as  AT&T  who has  an                                                               
agreement with  Netflix, and  said the  question was  whether end                                                               
users would feel the effects  and get Netflix faster than another                                                               
streaming  service.   She shared  it was  her understanding  that                                                               
Alaska would  feel the  effects if  Alaska passed  net neutrality                                                               
legislation, but  the federal government  did not, or  not enough                                                               
states passed  it to make  it impractical  for ISPs to  go around                                                               
net  neutrality  rules  across  the country.    She  suggested  a                                                               
scenario in  which GCI has  a peering agreement with  Time Warner                                                               
and  said consumers  would  feel the  effects  of their  content-                                                               
blocking, without ever contracting with Time Warner.                                                                            
4:28:49 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH  shared his  concern that the  situation was                                                               
being misrepresented.  He remarked  that testimony states the FCC                                                               
has  restored the  pre-2015 view  that broadband  internet is  an                                                               
information service and not a  utility common carrier service and                                                               
restored Federal Trade Commission  (FTC) authority over broadband                                                               
providers.   He  asked Ms.  Rich  whether she  has confidence  in                                                               
those agencies which were designed to protect the consumer.                                                                     
MS. RICH answered she was  not comfortable relying on the federal                                                               
government to  enforce the  rules.   She underlined  it is  not a                                                               
coincidence  that  the  legislation  has  such  broad  bipartisan                                                               
support and that 30 states have introduced similar legislation.                                                                 
REPRESENTATIVE  BIRCH  stated it  doesn't  appear  to him  to  be                                                               
4:33:01 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR KITO opened public testimony on HB 277.                                                                                   
4:33:25 PM                                                                                                                    
JERRY  KEEGAN, CTIA,  Trade  Association  for Wireless  Industry,                                                               
testified  in opposition  to  HB  277.   He  stated the  wireless                                                               
industry  supports  free  and  open   internet,  and  that  local                                                               
companies (AT&T,  GCI, Verizon  Wireless) agree  not to  block or                                                               
throttle lawful content  in an anti-competitive manner.   He said                                                               
strong  consumer protections  remain in  effect after  the recent                                                               
FCC decision, wherein  it restored FTC broad  authority to police                                                               
providers  and their  actions.   Additionally, FTC  can prosecute                                                               
providers who  try to adopt  anti-competitive practices,  such as                                                               
favoring  their  own  content  or  services.    He  remarked  FCC                                                               
retained its  transparency rule to  require providers  to present                                                               
extensive information  about their network  management practices.                                                               
He  added  the  Alaska  attorney  general  may  enforce  consumer                                                               
protection  laws of  general applicability  against any  provider                                                               
acting  anti-competitively, violating  its terms  of service,  or                                                               
not abiding by its agreements.   He stated the FCC's recent order                                                               
reaffirms  the  2015  decision   finding  that  broadband  is  an                                                               
interstate,  indeed  a  global offering,  preempting  states  and                                                               
localities in this area.   He opined state-by-state regulation of                                                               
broadband  services, especially  mobile broadband,  is untenable,                                                               
and added that he thought a  patchwork of state laws would hinder                                                               
innovation and increase the cost  of compliance.  He suggested it                                                               
would be unnecessary  to pass the proposed  bill considering what                                                               
ISPs  have  agreed to  do  and  the strong  consumer  protections                                                               
already in place.  He  stated CTIA supports a federal legislative                                                               
solution to ensure a free and open internet.                                                                                    
4:36:13 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE   SULLIVAN-LEONARD  asked   for   a  response   to                                                               
assertions  about   ISPs  blocking  access  to   content  on  the                                                               
MR. KEEGAN  answered the complaints  generally refer  to non-U.S.                                                               
carriers or  did not  involve net  neutrality violations  at all.                                                               
He stated  the AT&T incident  occurred over ten  years previously                                                               
involving a vendor who operated  a webcast for AT&T and explained                                                               
the current bill  does not address website operators.   He stated                                                               
the Telus incident did not involve  a U.S. company.  He added the                                                               
Verizon    incident   had    involved    a   single    employee's                                                               
misinterpretation of  policy and the decision  had been instantly                                                               
reversed.   He addressed peer-to-peer agreements  and stated they                                                               
would  not be  covered under  HB 277  as they  are not  broadband                                                               
internet access  services as defined  under the bill and  are not                                                               
mass-market retail services.                                                                                                    
4:38:42 PM                                                                                                                    
JACK BARNEY testified in support of  HB 277.  He said he believes                                                               
a fair  and open internet is  vital and the proposed  bill is the                                                               
most business-friendly way to achieve  that goal.  He pointed out                                                               
large business states such as  California have introduced similar                                                               
legislation.   He spoke to Representative  Birch's comments about                                                               
telephone regulation  and suggested the telephone  industry could                                                               
innovate because it  was under Title 2,  whereas internet service                                                               
was no  longer under Title  2 with the  recent FCC decision.   He                                                               
referred to the  analogy of the supermarket.  He  remarked "if we                                                               
were  to imagine  the entire  internet is  a grocery  store, what                                                               
this legislation is  doing is saying that a  grocery store cannot                                                               
say,  'I'm only  going to  give you  the opportunity  to purchase                                                               
Lucky Charms because  I have cut an inside deal  with them,' when                                                               
what I want is cornflakes."   He stated this legislation says the                                                               
market should be open and consumers  should be able to decide for                                                               
themselves what  should be  on the shelves  through the  power of                                                               
their purchases.                                                                                                                
4:41:08 PM                                                                                                                    
CHARLES MCKEE, Self, testified in the hearing on HB 277.                                                                        
4:42:37 PM                                                                                                                    
LEON JAIMES, Self, testified in support  of HB 277.  He stated he                                                               
has  worked in  the  information technology  services sector  for                                                               
over  20 years  and currently  works as  an information  security                                                               
consultant.   He  said  he  feels a  free  and  open internet  is                                                               
fundamental to  democracy and  that internet  connectivity allows                                                               
residents in  the most remote  areas of the state  to participate                                                               
in the global  economy.  He stated Alaska is  leading some of the                                                               
efforts  in telemedicine  for which  connectivity is  vital.   He                                                               
said without net neutrality regulations,  free speech and privacy                                                               
are at  risk.  He spoke  to recent data breaches  and pointed out                                                               
many ISPs  fail in their  data protection  efforts.  He  gave the                                                               
examples  of  an Alaska  Communications  2014  data breach  which                                                               
compromised the information of current  and former employees, and                                                               
the AT&T  2015 settlement with  the FCC over  a data breach.   He                                                               
underscored  the  data collection  that  is  necessary to  block,                                                               
throttle,  and   engage  in   paid  prioritization   is  directly                                                               
attributable to individuals,  and once it is collected  it can be                                                               
stolen with no recourse to recover it.                                                                                          
MR. JAIMES said  United States Senator Lisa  Murkowski has stated                                                               
she  supports  net  neutrality   and  has  said  the  fundamental                                                               
decisions on  internet policy should involve  the Congress, "they                                                               
are  that important."   Although  she  has sponsored  legislation                                                               
such  as the  North American  Energy Security  and Infrastructure                                                               
Act  of  2016  with  provisions for  securing  "the  internet  of                                                               
things" energy management solutions, not  one of the 2,915 pieces                                                               
of legislation  sponsored by the  senator is aimed  at protecting                                                               
net neutrality.                                                                                                                 
MR. JAIMES  spoke to a  comment made during a  previous committee                                                               
meeting  that net  neutrality is  not an  issue as  consumers are                                                               
free  to   switch  to  another   provider.    He   remarked  that                                                               
perspective shows  a fundamental  misunderstanding of what  is at                                                               
stake, as it is not only  that the connection of consumers can be                                                               
throttled, but  the services at  the other end of  the connection                                                               
may  be  throttled  as  well.    He  stated  the  website  of  an                                                               
entrepreneur  in  Nome may  be  deprioritized  so that  customers                                                               
around the  world, regardless of  their data plan,  cannot access                                                               
that  website.    He  added  telemedicine  is  another  important                                                               
example.   He suggested  ISP could  charge more  for telemedicine                                                               
connections regardless of technological advances.                                                                               
4:47:10 PM                                                                                                                    
SANTA CLAUS,  Self, testified in  support of net neutrality.   He                                                               
stated  the internet  was  designed to  enable  and protect  free                                                               
speech.   He said  net neutrality ensures  that ISPs  cannot slow                                                               
down  or block  content to  subscribers who  do not  want to  pay                                                               
extra  for preferential  service.   He  stated  that without  net                                                               
neutrality, an ISP  could decide to block or slow  down access to                                                               
internet content  throughout Alaska and internet  access could be                                                               
restricted to websites that contain  only particular religious or                                                               
political views.   He said net neutrality  encourages free speech                                                               
without discrimination and that  without it, legislators may have                                                               
to pay  ISPs more to  ensure their campaign websites  were viewed                                                               
along  with  their  opponents'   websites.    He  encouraged  the                                                               
committee  to protect  free speech  and ensure  equal and  timely                                                               
access to information to benefit all the people in the state.                                                                   
4:49:01 PM                                                                                                                    
GEORGE PIERCE, Self, testified in the hearing on HB 277.                                                                        
4:51:04 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR KITO announced that public testimony would be left open.                                                                  
HB 277 was held over.                                                                                                           

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
HB277 Sectional Analysis 1.29.18.pdf HL&C 2/9/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 277
HB277 Supporting Document-Dec. 15 Article Business Insider 1.29.18.pdf HL&C 2/9/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 277
HB277 Supporting Document-Dec. 15 Article NPR 1.29.18.pdf HL&C 2/9/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 277
HB277 Supporting Document-Portugal Payment Package Example 1.29.18.pdf HL&C 2/9/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 277
HB277 Supporting Document-Dec. 14 Article Business Insider 1.29.18.pdf HL&C 2/9/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 277
HB277 Supporting Document-University of Maryland Survey 1.29.18.pdf HL&C 2/9/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 277
HB277 ver D 1.29.18.pdf HL&C 2/9/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 277
HB277 Additional Document-Dec. 13 Article Business Insider 1.29.18.pdf HL&C 2/9/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 277
HB277 Additional Document-Jan. 4 FCC Order 1.29.18.pdf HL&C 2/9/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 277
HB277 Alaska Delegation Support Letters 2.7.18.pdf HL&C 2/9/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 277
HB277 Fiscal Note DCCED-RCA 2.2.18.pdf HL&C 2/9/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 277
HB277 Sponsor Statement 1.29.18.pdf HL&C 2/9/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 277
HB277 Fiscal Note DOL-ASD 2.2.18.pdf HL&C 2/9/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 277
HB318 Legislative Audit 2.7.18.pdf HL&C 2/9/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 318
HB318 Sponsor Statement 2.7.2018.pdf HL&C 2/9/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 318
HB318 Version A.PDF HL&C 2/9/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 318
HB318 Fiscal Note DCCED-CBPL 2.2.18.pdf HL&C 2/9/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 318
ADS letter to HLAC 1.31.18.pdf HL&C 2/9/2018 3:15:00 PM
Presentation Dentists
Dentist specialty numbers.pdf HL&C 2/9/2018 3:15:00 PM
Presentation Dentists
Support letter Board of Dental Examiners.pdf HL&C 2/9/2018 3:15:00 PM
Presentation Dentists
ADS letter to Alaska Legislature.pdf HL&C 2/9/2018 3:15:00 PM
Presentation Dentists
ADS Sponsor statement.pdf HL&C 2/9/2018 3:15:00 PM
Presentation Dentists
HB277 Opposition Letters 2.8.18.pdf HL&C 2/9/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 277
HB277 Supporting Documents-Letters of Support 2.9.18.pdf HL&C 2/9/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 277