Save the Internet Act of 2019

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WITTMAN. Madam Chair, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 1644, the so-called Save the Internet Act.

This legislation seeks to restore the FCC's heavy-handed, stifling title II regulations of 2015 to govern the internet, the same antiquated regulations originally enacted to regulate wired phone companies of the 1930s.

The internet, which is the single most important invention in modern human history, has thrived precisely due to light-touch regulations. Reinstating heavy-handed, stifling title II regulations on the internet is just plain bad policy.

My colleagues on the other side of the aisle have supported these stifling title II regulations to ensure what they call net neutrality and prevent unreasonable discrimination practices of blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization.

While I agree with my colleagues that no business should engage in these types of unreasonable business practices, this bill is hardly neutral. It blatantly ignores ``edge providers,'' such as Facebook and Google. Just read the headlines about their great behavior. They have made headlines for things like blocking, throttling, and requiring paid prioritization of consumer internet services.

Additionally, in the 2 years following the FCC's 2015 order to regulate the internet under the stifling title II, internet investments regulations, those investments have actually declined for the first time and only time in U.S. history outside of a recession.

As a Representative of some of the most unserved rural populations of Virginia, I have heard from providers, both large and small, that these stifling title II regulations have hindered their ability to expand service to rural populations. This is particularly concerning, as unserved areas already face extreme challenges to gaining access to broadband. Reinstating these stifling title II regulations would only further increase the digital divide between urban and rural America.

I am a cosponsor of three bills offered by Ranking Members Walden, Latta, and Rodgers, all based on bipartisan approaches, which prohibit the practices of blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization. I believe all three of these bills provide a bipartisan, permanent solution to opening the internet.

I urge my Democratic colleagues to work with Republicans to solve this issue.

Mr. MICHAEL F. DOYLE of Pennsylvania. Madam Chair, may I inquire how much time I have remaining.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source